...hasten death. See generally: Sidney Wanzer, et al., “The Physician’s Responsibility Toward Hopelessly Ill Patients: A Second Look,” 320 NEJMed 844, 1989. The most challenging complication is crossing the line between providing pain relief and causing death. The guiding precept for the clinical practice of PS is a doctrine that has its roots in Catholic theology: the principle of double effect. In an ideal world issues related to pain management at the end of life would be separate from the issue of physician-assisted suicide. Unfortunately, the debate over the use of opioids in PS has led to this unfortunate link. Dr. Timothy Quill focused attention on euthanasia in New York by disclosing in 1991 that he had prescribed a lethal dose of barbiturate for a cancer patient who was terminally ill. See, of course: Vacco v. Quill, 117 S. Ct. 2293, & Timothy Quill, “Death With Dignity: A Case of Individualized Decision Making,” 324 NEJMed 691, 1991. At the heart of the ethical debate over PS is the differentiation between sedation for intractable symptoms and euthanasia. The distinction lies in the intent. The intent of PS is relief of intractable distress, whereas the intent of euthanasia is to end life. The principle of double effect is the ethical justification for PS. It is used when it is impossible to avoid the undesirable effects of the narcotics (i.e., respiratory depression) because it helps us choose between two actions when neither choice is what we desire. The principal of...
Words: 977 - Pages: 4
...List Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963) Argersinger v. Hamlin, 407 U.S. 25 (1972) Carmell v. Texas, 529 U.S. 513 (2000) City of Houston, v. Hill, 482 U.S. 451 (1987) Miles v. United States, 101 U.S. 304 (1880) Miller v. Florida, 482 U.S. 423 (1963) RAV v. City of St. Paul, 505 U.S. 377 (1992) Abbate v. United States, 359 U.S. 187 (1959) Frisbie v. Collins, 342 U.S. 519 (1952) Hudson, v. United States, 522 U.S. 93 (1997) Petite v. United States, 361 U.S. 529 (1960) Waller v. Florida, 397 U.S. (1970) Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660 (1962) Smith v. United States, 508 U.S. 223 (1993) Atwater v. City of Lago Vista, 532 U.S. 318 (2001) Carella v. Claifornia, 491 U.S. 263 (1989) Liparota v. United States, 471 U.S. 419 (1985) Jacobsen v. United States, 503 U.S. 540 (1991) Medina v. California, 505 U.S. 437 (1992) Powell v. Texas, 392 U.S. 514 (1967) United States v. Bailey, 444 U.S. 394 (1979) Wisconsin v. Mitchell, 508 U.S. 476 (1993) Enmund v. Florida, 458 U.S. 782 (1982) Vacco v. Quill, 521 U.S. 793 (1997) Washington, et al. v. Glucksberg, 521 U.S. 702 (1997) Albers v. California, 354 U.S. 476 (1957) Doe v. Bolton, 410 U.S. 179 (1973) Heller v. New York, 413 U.S. 483 (1973) Kansas v. Crane, 534 U.S. 407 (2002) Kansas v. Hendricks, 521 U..S. 346 (1997) Kaplan v. California, 419 U.S. 915 (1974) Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003) Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973) Paris Adult Theater v. Slayton, 413 U.S. 49 (1973) Roe v. Wade, 410...
Words: 413 - Pages: 2
...Euthanasia: Live and Let Die April 11, 2013 Euthanasia: Live and Let Die In 2004, Pope John Paul II said “A man, even if seriously sick or prevented in the exercise of its higher functions, is and will be always a man… he will never become a ‘vegetable’ or an ‘animal’. The intrinsic value and personal dignity of every human being does not change depending on their circumstances” (Pope John Paul II, 2004). Euthanasia or assisted suicide is the deliberate action of ending a life in order to relieve unstoppable suffering. Euthanasia is legal in Albania, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Switzerland, as well as some US states. In some of these countries, euthanasia is generally executed by a medical professional taking into account his patient’s needs and desires; but sometimes a medical professional can dispense the last medication ending his patient’s life without the patient’s consent. However, euthanasia and assisted suicide is forbidden in the majority of countries and could be penalized by a fourteen years prison sentence. (“Euthanasia and assisted, intro”). Legalizing euthanasia is extremely controversial moral and legal issue throughout the world, but achieving that goal is extremely necessary. Although legalizing euthanasia could cause negative effects for society, the positive side of this controversy indicates that asking for death is important for those patients who have decided that after a certain point, the pain has exceeded the desire of living. On the one hand...
Words: 1548 - Pages: 7
...The word euthanasia is a combination of the Greek prefix Eu, which means “good,” and “thanatos,” meaning “death. Webster’s Dictionary defines it as “the act or practice of killing individuals that are hopelessly sick or injured for reasons of mercy. Euthanasia or “mercy killing” as they more commonly call it is a highly debated topic that has many aspects. Financial, moral, social, and most important, legal concerns are raised whenever euthanasia is brought up. The controversy surrounding euthanasia can only be resolved when the procedure is legalized with mandatory, regulatory guidelines put in place to enable both physicians and individuals to decide the best course of action for themselves without fear. An individual’s view of euthanasia is influenced by religious and personal beliefs, current law, and medical assistance. The moral debate involves religion and other societal beliefs. Everyone has their own morals and values, which is their God-given, constitutional right. In America, our society’s morals are based in part on religious beliefs. Most religions, especially Christian religions, feel that taking life is wrong and against God’s commandments. The Catholic Church feels strongly about euthanasia and encourages both the Catholic congregation and United States politicians to maintain the illegal status of euthanasia (Christian Medical Fellowship). Various religions impose their beliefs and morals on the individual causing more confusion. In Euthanasia: The Battle for...
Words: 2108 - Pages: 9
...It is a patients right to be able to have the choice. According to an article by ACLU Amicus Brief in Vacco v. Quill "The right of a competent, terminally ill person to avoid excruciating pain and embrace a timely and dignified death bears the sanction of history and is implicit in the concept of ordered liberty.” This means that they have a right to a dignified death by law. They also state that ,”A state's categorical ban on physician assistance to suicide -- as applied to competent, terminally ill patients who wish to avoid unendurable pain and hasten inevitable death -- substantially interferes with this protected liberty interest and cannot be sustained." They are saying that the ban on assisted suicide doesn’t allow for the patients liberty to be practiced. Which means that the laws are unjust and they should have the option of assisted...
Words: 777 - Pages: 4
...euthanasia cases. Euthanasia or assisted suicide is illegal in most countries around the world. In the United States, Dr Jack Kervorkian – nicknamed ‘Doctor Death’ for his actions beliefs – has campaigned for a change in the law for many years, and assisted in the suicide of at least 45 people.” (Brooks) Physician assisted suicide has always been an ongoing argument. It can be both inductive and deductive depending on the premise. I will be looking at the different pros and cons of physician assisted suicide and comparing as to whether or not we can determine a sound solution. The state can't stop people from defining their existence and choosing death The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit stated in its 1996 Opinion from Quill v. Vacco: - "What concern prompts the state to interfere with a mentally competent patient's...
Words: 1015 - Pages: 5
...Cambridge University Press 0521804167 - Euthanasia, Ethics and Public Policy: An Argument Against Legalisation John Keown Frontmatter More information EUTHANASIA, ETHICS AND PUBLIC POLICY An Argument against Legalisation Whether the law should permit voluntary euthanasia or physicianassisted suicide is one of the most vital questions facing all modern societies. Internationally, the main obstacle to legalisation has proved to be the objection that, even if they were morally acceptable in certain hard cases, voluntary euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide could not be effectively controlled; society would slide down a slippery slope to the killing of patients who did not make a free and informed request, or for whom palliative care would have offered an alternative. How cogent is this objection? This book provides the general reader (who need have no expertise in philosophy, law or medicine) with a lucid introduction to this central question in the debate, not least by reviewing the Dutch euthanasia experience. It will interest readers in any country, whether for or against legalisation, who wish to ensure that their opinions are better informed. john keown is Senior Lecturer in the Law and Ethics of Medicine, Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge. His previous publications include Abortion, Doctors and the Law (1988) and Euthanasia Examined (1995). © Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 0521804167 - Euthanasia, Ethics and...
Words: 3306 - Pages: 14
...THE LAW ON ASSISTED SUICIDE On July 26, 1997, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously upheld decisions in New York and Washington state that criminalized assisted suicide. These decisions overturned rulings in the 2nd and 9th Circuit Courts of Appeal which struck down state statutes banning physician-assisted suicide. Those courts had found that the statutes, which prohibited doctors from prescribing lethal medication to competent, terminally ill adults, violated the 14th Amendment. In striking the appellate decisions, the U.S. Supreme Court found that there was no constitutional "right to die," but left it to individual states to enact legislation permitting or prohibiting physician-assisted suicide. (The full text of these decisions, plus reports and commentary, can be found at the Washinton Post web site.) As of April 1999, physician-assisted suicide is illegal in all but a handful of states. Over thirty states have enacted statutes prohibiting assisted suicide, and of those that do not have statutes, a number of them arguably prohibit it through common law. In Michigan, Jack Kevorkian was initially charged with violating the state statute, in addition to first-degree murder and delivering a controlled substance without a license. The assisted suicide charge was dropped, however, and he was eventually convicted of second degree murder and delivering a controlled substance without a license. Only one state, Oregon, has legalized assisted suicide. The Oregon statute...
Words: 13101 - Pages: 53
...Physician Assisted Suicide Candace Riffe We all reach that point in our lives when our tickers just doesn’t tick the way they used to. When this happens most of us take many restless trips to our doctors. Time after time of visits, medicines and no cure incite patients begin to lose their will to live. Fortunately, the man from above granted us doctors. Doctors have the power to ease our minds and bodies in times of illness. At the point of no return, when you and your body have completely given up, Physician Assisted Suicide should be an option. I know, suicide sounds absolutely insane. Pick your jaw back up and keep an open mind. There’s a 74 year old male suffering with the 4th stage of pancreatic cancer. He’s retired, his children are grown and his wife is deceased. After all of these years of many doctors’ visits and treatments he’s finally come to peace with the idea of dying. His mind, body and heart could easily be put to rest with just one lethal dose given by a doctor. The idea of assisted suicide sounds absurd to some but does a slow painful death really sound like an appealing alternative? For years, doctors have been prohibited from assisting patients in taking their own lives. Doctors are trained to know when a patient’s days are numbered. Why would it ever be necessary to force someone to endure years of suffering? Wouldn’t it be more ethical to give the patient the option to say when they’ve had enough? The right to die is a given right. Nowhere in the...
Words: 1244 - Pages: 5
...ALCOHOL The legal drinking age is the age at which a person can consume or purchase alcohol. These laws cover a wide range of issues and behaviours, addressing when and where alcohol can be consumed. The minimum age alcohol can be legally consumed can be different from the age when it can be purchased. These laws vary among different countries and many laws have exemptions or special circumstances. Most laws apply only to drinking alcohol in public places, with alcohol consumption in the home being mostly unregulated. Some countries also have different age limits for different types of alcoholic drinks. PRO Lowering Drinking Age 18 is the age of adulthood in the United States, and adults should have the right to make their own decisions about alcohol consumption. Turning 18 entails receiving the rights and responsibilities of adulthood to vote, smoke cigarettes, serve on juries, get married, sign contracts, be prosecuted as adults, and join the military - which includes risking one's life. [5] [6] CON Lowering Drinking Age The right to drink should have a higher age of initiation because of the dangers posed by drinking. Many rights in the United States are conferred on citizens at age 21 or older. A person cannot legally purchase a handgun, gamble in a casino (in most states), or adopt a child until age 21, rent a car (for most companies) at age 25, or run for President until age 35. Drinking should be similarly restricted due to the responsibility required to...
Words: 1079 - Pages: 5
...has fundamental rights that are granted to them for being a citizen. For example, the First Amendment grants everyone the fundamental right to practice their own religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, etc. The 15th Amendment lets people have the right to vote, as well as having the right to incarcerate or appoint the death penalty for a defendant, while serving on a jury panel. Individuals have the right to bear arms due to the Second Amendment, people are allowed to legally kill an individual due to stand your ground law, and the 14th Amendment lets women have the legal right to terminate a pregnancy. For example, Roe v. Wade, the United States Supreme Court case that granted and permits women to terminate a pregnancy. The judicial circuit of Florida found George Zimmerman not guilty of the death of Trayvon Martin in the, State of Florida v. George Zimmerman (2013) case. Yet, people do not have the right to be put to death on their own terms. Why is there not a law in the Constitution for individuals that want to end their lives by physician-assisted suicide or voluntary euthanasia? The United States Constitution does not mention the right to die, either dying by physician-assisted suicide or voluntary euthanasia. Why are women allowed to terminate a pregnancy, but a person has to hurt themselves and go through excruciating pain in order to end their life? Society permits other individuals to take other individual’s lives under certain laws. For example, self-defense...
Words: 1362 - Pages: 6
...Jack Kevorkian’s life and the effects of his life’s work on the United States. Murphy speaks of Dr. Kevorkian taking the lives of over 130 people, mostly suffering terminal and debilitating illnesses like Alzheimer’s and Lou Gehrig’s disease. He states that Kevorkian began his career as a graduate of the University of Michigan medical school and was entranced by the use of death row inmates to test and study drugs, procedures, and learn more about the process of dying in the 1950s. He highlights that the doctor’s intentions laid with the better medical use of vodies before and after death. He reviews the more famous of legal precedents Vacco v. Quill 1997 and Washington v. Glucksberg 1997. He notes a comment from the doctor’s lawyer stating that after imprisonment for his actions he had some regret for taking a failing approach at bringing this method into public awareness. Murphy takes almost a condemning tone towards Jack Kevorkian. Though many look at his actions as just unethical and illegal I believe that there are some benefits to his life’s work. The one aspect to this article that I think Murphy annotated very well is the lasting impact that Kevorkian’s work had on the...
Words: 1239 - Pages: 5
...United Church of Christ: The Church affirms individual freedom and responsibility. It has not asserted that hastened dying is the Christian position, but the right to choose is a legitimate Christian decision. Mainline and Liberal Christian denominations: Pro-choice statements have been made by the United Church of Christ, and the Methodist Church on the US West coast. The 'Episcopalian (Anglican) Unitarian, Methodist, Presbyterian and Quaker movements are amongst the most liberal, allowing at least individual decision making in cases of active euthanasia The BBC wrote in an Aug. 3, 2009 online article titled "Religion & Ethics - Christianity: Euthanasia - the Christian View" on www.bbc.co.uk: "Christians are mostly against euthanasia. The arguments are usually based on the beliefs that life is given by God, and that human beings are made in God's image. Some churches also emphasise the importance of not interfering with the natural process of death... Christians believe that the intrinsic dignity and value of human lives means that the value of each human life is identical. They don't think that human dignity and value are measured by mobility, intelligence, or any achievements in life. Valuing human beings as equal just because they are human beings has clear implications for thinking about euthanasia: • patients in a persistent vegetative state, although seriously damaged, remain living human beings, and so their intrinsic value remains the same as anyone...
Words: 7225 - Pages: 29
...Living Wills and Euthanasia Penny Hockensmith Social Ethics PHI 320 Professor Haussmann May 30th, 2012 A) It is good to be in control of my medical. B. An informed living will prescribes my medical decisions when I am unconscious. C. A living will is good. Should living wills over ride doctors and caretakers? THE STORY Imagine someone you love or better yet, imagine yourself lying in a hospital bed oblivious to the world around you, unable to move or show any signs of life, your own existence controlled by an I.V., a respiratory machine, and a feeding tube. In essence you are dead. Your body is no longer able to sustain life, its entire purpose is now replaced by a machine - you are being kept alive by artificial means. At this point the question arises - should you be kept alive by these means or should you be allowed to die a natural death? Unfortunately you are unable to answer this question because your voice is limited to a "beep" on a heart monitor machine. Who then is going to decide if you live artificially or die naturally? Who gets to play God? Well, if your family doesn't have your written consent in the form of a living will, to cease life support, then the doctor will make the ultimate decision for both you and your family. Most often this is the case. Even though writing a living will is just as easy if not easier than writing a death will, many people don't take the time to do so. Therefore, doctors have to debate the question of euthanasia – a question...
Words: 2285 - Pages: 10
...Euthanasia Debate May 24, 2010 Professor Melissa Green, M.H.A. Euthanasia Debate Every day in the field of medicine professionals are faced with an ethical decision or problem. The advancements in medicine and technology are raising questions and concerns never once thought of. Controversy over euthanasia is on the forefront of today’s health care platform. With the present change occurring with the American Heath Care Reform health care providers and society need to be informed of the options available in end of life care. This paper will present a debate about human euthanasia. Euthanasia will first be defined. Support for each side of the debate will be presented. Each side will be provided with questions from the opposing side, with the opposing teams response presented. Each side will then present a closing statement, again to support their side from the result of the debate. Euthanasia defined Euthanasia is the practice of mercifully ending a person's life to free someone from a deadly disease. The word euthanasia comes from the Greek word "good death." The term euthanasia is being used synonymously with the term Physician Assisted Suicide (PAS), although they are not one and the same. PAS generally refers to a practice in which the physician provides a patient with a lethal dose of medication, upon the patient's request, which the patient intends to use to end his or her own life (University of Washington School of Medicine, 2010). Voluntary...
Words: 4490 - Pages: 18
