Research and Discussions Euthanasia and Terminally Ill

Euthanasia and Terminally Ill
Institutional Affiliation
Student’s Name
Date
1
The question of euthanasia in the wake of technological advancement conflicts with traditional values on the sanctity of life. The ethical dilemma is posed by the society value of personal autonomy. In some cases, the physician opinion is relevant concerning whether an individual who is terminally ill should undergo death assistance. Under the ethical dilemma and the discussion that ensues, terms like ‘autonomy,' ‘liberty,' ‘best of interest' and ‘justice' keep on reappearing. The question, therefore, should terminally ill patients have an option of euthanasia and be treated as an individual right? Euthanasia should not be regulated by lawmakers who have little understanding of the situation terminally ill undergoes but rather is personal and borders an individual right to privacy, right to live and right to die on one's terms.
When the debate about euthanasia is started, most people associate euthanasia with physician-assisted suicide. However, there are two types of euthanasia, passive euthanasia, and active euthanasia. A Clear understanding of both kinds would inform public opinion and public debate. Passive Voluntary euthanasia is when the physicians take no action to keep a patient alive. Actions like removing ventilators or failure to insert feeding tube are an example of passive euthanasia. In patients who are terminally ill and have brain damage, keeping them alive artificially is torture and denies them the right to closure. Such individuals are denied right to end their life with dignity.
The intent of palliative care is to alleviate pain and suffering, and physicians can administer death causing the medication to relieve the patient from suffering. Lindblad, Lynoe, and Juth, (2014) argues that it is morally justifiable to create evil in pursuit of good. However the question of who gets to input decision regarding death.
Under the fourteenth amendment, the liberty interest which is also the individual right of choice is guaranteed. Competent Terminally ill patients thus have the right to choose in advance and make legally binding advance directive in anticipation of inability to accept the withdrawal of treatment, in a voluntary passive euthanasia. What is not permitted is hastening death through additional medication. Active euthanasia, therefore, forms the bone of contention. Autonomy is a highly valued principle, and patients and family should participate actively in end of life decisions. Under liberty of interest, patients should be allowed to choose the time, the manner of their death.
In pursuit of medical justice, fair and equal treatment of all patients should adhere. In most cases, terminally ill patients are too debilitated to explore the end of life options actively. In such situations physicians usually, deny them the chance to options available. Another issue is the effect of terminal illness on family members. It is sad to remember loved ones at death as helpless, incontinent, pain-racked, or even sedated. Everyone wishes to leave a good memory on their loved ones. Therefore, the opportunity to die with dignity s...