Euthanasia/Assisted Suicide Debate Sample PSY663

Euthanasia/Assisted Suicide Debate Sample PSY663

Euthanasia/Assisted Suicide Debate Sample PSY663

Euthanasia/Assisted Suicide Debate

Euthanasia and physician-assisted suicides has raised many issues as it will test individual’s religious beliefs, morals, and values. Writing this paper to talk about my own religious beliefs, morals, and values in regard to euthanasia whether it is passive or active, and if I consider euthanasia or physician assist suicide should be voluntary or involuntary. My own religious beliefs, morals, and values are tested when it pertains to certain types of individuals such as elderly, infants, disabled, minorities, women, or low income. In the conclusion of my paper I will discuss the state laws regarding euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide in Arizona.Euthanasia/Assisted Suicide Debate Sample PSY663

ORDER COMPREHENSIVE SOLUTION PAPERS ON Euthanasia/Assisted Suicide Debate Sample PSY663

Euthanasia

Finding what is the meaning of euthanasia and asking other individuals what they think euthanasia means, I found out they never thought about euthanasia involving humans. Many individuals think euthanasia is a mercy killing of animals and did not think about what it met to end a human life (Varelius, 2016). At this point they changed their definition to be like mine, which is assisting an individual to end their life intentional and voluntary because they are suffering from a chronic terminal illness and do not want to prolong their life past the normal expectancy. If the individual is going to have to depend upon a machine to do their breathing, pumping blood through their heart and body, or keep brain activity going but not really functioning on their own then they are not really living but existing for the sake of someone else (Varelius, 2016).Euthanasia/Assisted Suicide Debate Sample PSY663

Types of Euthanasia: Passive/ Active

Euthanasia and physician assisted suicide has been a topic some individuals avoid, some have strong religious beliefs, morals, and values against, and some understand it is at times necessary in certain cases. For decades it has been debated heavily as it involves the individual, the family members, physicians, healthcare staff, lawyers, state laws and regulations. My perception is euthanasia and physician assisted suicide can have traits of passive and active and I base this on an individual has the right to voluntarily accept and consent to this. The difference between active and passive physician-assisted suicide is what role does the physician play in the patient’s death and is it the part is more extensive in voluntary active euthanasia (Varelius, 2016). Active euthanasia is the result of the individual’s death with the assistance of a physician or the individual with the physicians help. Passive euthanasia is a result of the individual dying from a terminally illness. When I think about the ethics and morals of active and passive euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide is a physician or the individual intends on ending their life, but with the other you foresee the death from being terminally ill.

Euthanasia Beliefs

Religious beliefs, morals, and values are tested in every day society and cultures especially when it involves involuntary euthanasia and physician-assisted suicides. If an individual chooses to pass away and withhold oxygen or treatment, then it is their right to do so. If they have set up legal documents in place such a medical directive, living will, medical power of attorney, or they are in the right frame of mind to verbally state this and should be allowed by regardless of state laws.

My own religious beliefs, morals, and values have been challenged in real life as my husband decided to pull out his respirator after receiving news from his physician of a terminal illness. His two daughters wanted it inserted back into him, however, I had the final say the dilemma was hard to make. My religious beliefs being raised in a religious household told me this would be a form a suicide and would he go to heaven committing a form of suicide. After praying I knew I had to stand by my husband’s decision as he was in his right mind to make the decision and it came down to if he lived it would be by the hand of God allowing him to breathe on his own without machines doing it for him. He died that same night because he chose to withhold oxygen and not suffer the next six months in pain and lose his dignity of not be able to make his own decisions after a certain period, so he is at peace and rest with no suffering and pain.

Patients cannot always make the choice and need to look to loved ones, family, health care professionals, a religious leader, and seek legal advice as to involuntary euthanasia. Each patient faces different circumstances in their well-being and health care, so it would need to be reviewed on a case by case basis of involuntary euthanasia. Their beliefs would be different as well as each state having their own laws to be considered. The beliefs of an individual may need to be protected by family, loved ones, or even a third party such as healthcare professionals making the decisions for a patient, however, in my experience it has to be what is in the best interest of the patient and not for an individual who will profit from the death. What I learned is your beliefs, morals, and values are tested when it comes to making decisions regarding the death of a loved one and doing what is in their best interest and keep within the laws.

Special Population Groups Adversely Affected by Euthanasia

Special population groups in my perception are infants, elderly, disabled, mentally disabled, minorities, women, and low-income populations and must be protected because they may not be able to comprehend mentally or able to speak for themselves in healthcare matters. The question becomes are individuals with disabilities, the elderly, the poor, minorities, and women endanger if physician-assisted suicide becomes legal across United States (ProCon.org, 2011). There is the possibility of special population groups becoming endangered, however, the current laws in certain states protect them from physician-assisted suicide. In Oregon and Washington, physician-assisted suicide is legal but the legal regulations in these states protect special population groups and using data collected from these states they could support the protection of the special population groups. An example of this is reading what Susan Okie, MD, a Contributing Editor of the New England Journal of Medicine from the ProCon.org resource about physician-assisted suicide that “there is no evidence that it has been used to coerce elderly, poor, or depressed patients to end their lives …” and “only 2 of the 208 patients who died by means of lethal medication were uninsured” (ProCon.org, 2018,). It is clearly the responsibility of the physicians to improve the care of individuals who are terminally ill and have no hope of improving their medical situation. They should ensure the communication with the individuals is clear and concise including an advance directive, pain control, how many times to be revived, the development of hospices, and what role euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide has in their life if they choose to not continue with medical treatments.Euthanasia/Assisted Suicide Debate Sample PSY663

My Beliefs on Euthanasia and Special Population Groups

My beliefs on euthanasia and special population groups of infants, elderly, disabled, mentally disabled, minorities, women, and low-income populations is a double-edge sword. I think about my religious upbringing of any euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide violates the sanctity of life given to you by God. The medical side of me and having cared for loved ones and family members who have had many chronic diseases or illnesses and they chose to let God decide if it was their time to continue to live or die. When it comes to special population groups my belief is they were sent to be born and should live their natural lives out however long that may be. An infant may not be able to make this choice, but their parents or guardian can and there is a purpose we all have on this earth when being born into this world. We may not know what our purpose is to influence someone else or ourselves to learn from our time on earth. It should not matter what your population status is in life we all have a right to live and if we have a choice to make the decision to leave this earth then we make our decision made to those who love us and will make these decisions when we can not longer do it for ourselves. In my belief, a third party such as healthcare staff within the healthcare facilities should review each patent’s chart and medical records to ensure ethical, quality, and equal practice is being given to special population groups.

Physician Assisted Suicide in Arizona

Arizona law currently bans physician-assisted suicide and the laws make it clear that physicians are to follow the written guidelines of a patient with a medical directive as long as it does not allow for suicide, assisted suicide, or mercy killing (Center for Arizona Policy, 2014). The viewpoint in Arizona is physician-assisted suicides and euthanasia is allowing this to happen devalues human life and protecting special population groups who may not be able to make the decision of their quality of life and ignoring their true wishes. Arizona law does allow individuals with a written advanced medical directive to exercise their right in writing to not accept medical treatment, fluids, or nourishment (CAP, 2014).

My beliefs will support what Arizona law fights to keep that if there are written advanced directives stating exactly what the individual’s wishes are with no deviation from this document. Knowing that my rights are protected when I will not be able to make the decision on my own gives a sense of peace. The other suggestion I would give individuals is to ensure they have an advanced directive, appoint someone they can trust to have medical power of attorney delegating the responsibility to make sound medical decisions, and a living will that is specifying exactly what medical treatments are to be given and how many times to be revived.

In Oregon under the Death With Dignity Law, a person who seeks physician-assisted suicide are required to meet a certain criteria’s such as: the person must be terminally ill, have under a year to live, make a written request for assistance in dying, persuade two medical doctors that it is a voluntary decision, and not be suffering from depression or any other mental disability (Law. jRank, 2018). Which in Arizona this is not legal to have physician-assisted suicide, whereas in Oregon they are allowed physician-assisted suicide under their laws since 1994.

Conclusion

The disputes of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide have several laws, ethics, morals, and values to be consider. With these debates and differences in opinion it tests your beliefs when it comes to involuntary and voluntary euthanasia, and whether it is passive or active. Depending on what the medical circumstances and the individual involved involuntary euthanasia can be justified especially if this is the individuals wishes. As stated before it is what an individual chooses when faced with a terminal illness and to make sure everything is in writing using the legal documents within the state you reside in. Every human life has intrinsic value, even those who suffer from physical disabilities or disease and the state laws must protect the most vulnerable among us and demonstrate that every life is worth protecting (CAP, 2014).

References

Center for Arizona Policy, (2014). Physician-Assisted Suicide & Denial of Care, http://www.azpolicypages.com/life/physician-assisted-suicide-denial-of-care/

Levy, T., Azar, S., Huberfeld, R., Siegel, A., & Strous, R., (2013) Attitudes towards euthanasia and assisted suicide: A comparison between psychiatrists and other physicians, Bioethics, September 2013, Volume 27, Issue 7, pp. 402-408, doi: 10.111/j.1467-8519.2012. 01968.x, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1467-8519.2012.01968.x

Law.jRank, (2018). Euthanasia-Oregon’s euthanasia law, http://law.jrank.org/pages/6602/Euthanasia-Oregon-s-Euthanasia-Law.html.Euthanasia/Assisted Suicide Debate Sample PSY663

Marker, R.L., (2013). Euthanasia, assisted suicide and health care decisions: Protecting yourself and your family, Patients’ Rights Council, http://www.patientsrightscouncil.org/site/euthanasia-assisted-suicide-health-care-decisions/

Mazloom, S., Jahromi, A., & Bastani, B., (2017). Legalization of euthanasia and physician-assisted dying: Condemnation of physician participation. Online Journal of Health Ethics, 2017, Volume 13, Issue 1, pp. 1-4, ISSN: 1551-4218, doi: 10.18785/ojhe.1301.18, http://eds.a.ebscohost.com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=10&sid=366d2b5b-8b93-48b4-97ea-bfcc4ec7c615%40sessionmgr4009

Merino, S., Aruanno, M., Gelpi, R., & Rancich, A., (2017). The prohibition of euthanasia and medical oaths of hippocratic stemma, Acta Bioethica, 2017, Volume 23, Issue 1, pp. 171-178, ISSN: 0717-5906, doi: not available, http://eds.a.ebscohost.com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=8&sid=366d2b5b-8b93-48b4-97ea-bfcc4ec7c615%40sessionmgr4009

Murphy, S., (2017). Legalization of assisted suicide and euthanasia: Foundation issues and implications., BYU Journal of Public Law, 2017, Volume 31, Issue 2, pp. 333-394, ISSN: 0896-2383, doi: 10.1007/s11673-013-9451-x, http://eds.b.ebscohost.com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=13&sid=23a597f8-bb7a-40aa-b1a3-dd3e70b3237a%40sessionmgr120

ProCon.org, (2018). Euthanasia: Special Groups, https://euthanasia.procon.org/,

Varelius, J., (2016). Active and passive physician-assisted dying and the terminal disease requirement., Bioethics, November 2016, Volume 30, /issue 9, pp. 663-671, doi: 10.1111/bioe.12282, http://eds.b.ebscohost.com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=5&sid=579ce137-bd8f-48a9-8249-bf007a631b52%40sessionmgr101