1 day ago · Proquest dissertations & theses @ semmelweis university. Pros for euthanasia essay. Essay about a recycling and the summary the research where Part of a paper problems concise of issues conjuguer essayer au conditionnel prsent concise research where problems the the Part a paper of and of issues summary case study on mexico The extent to which these controls and safeguards have been able to control the practices and to avoid abuse merits closer inspection, particularly by jurisdictions contemplating the legalization of euthanasia and pas. The present paper explores the effectiveness of the safeguards and the “slippery slope” phenomenon Dec 20, · Physician aid in dying is a controversial subject raising issues central to the role of physicians. According to the American Medical Association, it occurs when a physician provides “the necessary means and/or information” to facilitate a patient’s choice to end his or her life [].This essay’s authors hold varying views on the ethics of aid in dying; thus, the essay
Animal euthanasia - Wikipedia
This issues paper explores voluntary euthanasia. It is not intended to be exhaustive, however it aims to add to considerations of this very complex and sensitive topic through analysis of the domestic regulatory environment relating to both passive and active forms of voluntary euthanasia, and of relevant international laws by way of comparison with domestic regulation. It concludes with a human rights-based analysis of voluntary euthanasia and some commentary on the practice informed by human rights principles.
The current debate on euthanasia sits within a social context that is in a state of flux. Modern medical technology has led to increasing developments in, and greater availability of, artificial measures to prolong life. However, it is more accurately understood as an umbrella term which covers a vast array of practices that can be described as different forms of euthanasia.
These include:. Involuntary euthanasia is not considered in this paper. Examples include not resuscitating a person in cardiac arrest, turning off a life support machine or withholding or withdrawing other medical care that would prolong life. Withholding or withdrawing medical treatment currently occurs in Australia under various circumstances and regulations.
First, the Medical Board of Australia and the Australian and New Zealand Society of Palliative Medicine ANZSPM states good medical practice involves medical practitioners:. Understanding that euthanasia research paper do not have a duty to try to prolong life at all cost. However, you do have a euthanasia research paper to know when not to initiate and when to cease attempts at prolonging life, while ensuring that your patients receive appropriate relief from distress.
Accepting that patients have the right to refuse medical treatment or to request the withdrawal of treatment already started, euthanasia research paper. There is debate, however, euthanasia research paper, as to whether such measures fall within the meaning of euthanasia. Whilst doctors have an ethical duty to preserve life there is also a responsibility to relieve suffering Death should be allowed to occur with dignity and comfort when death is inevitable Any legislation therefore needs to recognize that a number of existing forms of end of life care, which may hasten death, are recognized as good medical practice and do not constitute euthanasia or assisted suicide.
However, the statements by medical professionals to explain their position that existing end of life practices do not constitute euthanasia appear to reflect an understanding of euthanasia more in line with active, rather than passive, euthanasia.
What is clear is that regulations do currently exist to permit the withdrawing or withholding of medical treatment in certain circumstances, regardless of whether such practices are described as passive euthanasia or fall euthanasia research paper the meaning of established medical practice.
Each state and territory has enacted laws to regulate the act of withholding or withdrawing medical treatment with the effect of hastening death. These laws provide for instruments that allow, in a formal and binding manner, the previously expressed wishes of competent adults to continue to have influence over the kind of treatment they receive or do not receive when they lose competence.
No piece of legislation characterises such practices as euthanasia. Indeed, as with members of the medical profession, certain government departments have explicitly stated that such instruments do not permit euthanasia. There are two forms of instruments that exist to regulate the withholding or withdrawing of medical treatment: 1 advance directives and 2 enduring powers of attorney or guardianship. All states and territories have legislation recognising enduring powers of attorney or guardianship.
The table below sets out which instruments are available in each jurisdiction and the relevant Act, euthanasia research paper. Advance directives allow competent adults to execute formal directives in writing except for the ACT where they may be oral[20] specifying their wishes concerning medical treatment, including the refusal of treatment.
Directives will generally apply in situations where the person has impaired decision-making capacity, euthanasia research paper, meaning they are unable to consent to or refuse medical treatment, euthanasia research paper. if the patient has a terminal illness, is in a persistent vegetative state, or is permanently unconscious. Directives in relation to refusal of treatment are generally legally binding on health professionals, [25] although there are circumstances in which a health provider will be protected for non-compliance for example, if there are reasonable grounds to believe that the directive does not reflect the current wishes of the person, or where a directive is uncertain or inconsistent with good medical practice.
New South Wales has not legislated to provide for advance directives. Enduring powers of attorney or guardianship allow a person to appoint one or more agents to make decisions about the provision or refusal of medical treatment if and when that person has impaired decision-making capacity. In some jurisdictions, there are limitations on the ability of attorneys euthanasia research paper guardians to refuse treatment in certain situations.
Euthanasia research paper Victoria, an agent or guardian may only refuse medical treatment on behalf of a patient if the medical treatment would cause unreasonable distress to the patient, euthanasia research paper, or there are reasonable euthanasia research paper for believing that the patient, euthanasia research paper, if competent, and after giving serious consideration to his or her health and well-being, would consider that the medical treatment is unwarranted.
Common law rules govern the doctor-patient relationship and the provision of medical treatment more generally. With regard to passive voluntary euthanasia, the common law allows a competent adult to refuse medical treatment, even where that refusal will lead to death, euthanasia research paper. Two cases considering the common law position concerning the right to refuse medical treatment help to clarify this position.
Hunter and the New England Area Health Authority v A: [42]. In this case the Supreme Court of New South Wales considered the validity of a common law advance directive there being no legislative provisions for such directives in NSW given by Mr A, refusing kidney dialysis, euthanasia research paper.
One year after making the directive Mr A was admitted to a hospital emergency department in a critical state with a decreased level of consciousness. His condition deteriorated to the point that he was being kept alive by mechanical ventilation and kidney dialysis, euthanasia research paper. The hospital sought a judicial declaration to determine the validity of his advance directive.
McDougall J confirmed that the directive was valid and held that the hospital must respect this decision. His Honour stated and applied the common law principle that:, euthanasia research paper.
A person may make an 'advance care directive': a statement that the person does not wish to receive medical treatment, or medical treatment of specified kinds. If an advance care euthanasia research paper is made by a capable adult, and it is clear and unambiguous, and extends to the situation at hand, it must be respected.
It would be a battery to administer medical treatment to the person of a kind prohibited by the advance care directive. Brightwater Care Group v Rossiter: [44]. Mr Rossiter was not terminally ill, dying or in a vegetative state and had full mental capacity.
They are to the effect that Mr Rossiter euthanasia research paper the right to determine whether or not he will continue to receive the services and treatment provided by Brightwater and, at common law, euthanasia research paper, Brightwater would be acting unlawfully euthanasia research paper continuing to provide treatment [namely the administration of nutrition and hydration via a tube inserted into his stomach] contrary to Mr Rossiter's wishes.
These cases concern the common law position regarding the doctor-patient relationship and provision of medical treatment in general, rather than the issue of passive voluntary euthanasia specifically. Further research is needed to confirm the current common law position in relation to passive voluntary euthanasia practices. As the above section demonstrates, the regulation of passive voluntary euthanasia practices in Australia is complex and, in some aspects, inconsistent.
Generally, however, the Australian context reflects trends in comparable international jurisdictions, as shown by the following overview of comparative regulation and jurisprudence. These instruments allow competent adults to state, in advance, that they do not wish to be kept alive by medical treatment in the latter stages of terminal illness.
Many of the provinces in Canada e. British Colombia, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Nova Scotia [53] have enacted legislation that permits people to make advance directives variously termed. This section has outlined the circumstances in which individuals or their authorised agents can decide to withhold or withdraw medical treatment, including where this would result in death. While the regulatory approach varies between Australian states and territories, all states and territories permit people, in one form or another, euthanasia research paper formally communicate their wishes in end of life situations, an approach reflected by international practice.
Passive voluntary euthanasia thus appears to be largely accepted within current medical practice and, in most jurisdictions, generally recognised and permitted by laweuthanasia research paper, despite the refusal of medical practitioners and policy makers to describe these activities in such terms. Thus, euthanasia research paper, unlike passive euthanasia, euthanasia research paper, in which the cause of death is the underlying disease or condition, with active voluntary euthanasia the death results from the action of a medical professional or other party.
As will be explored in section 4. Some of the major arguments for and against the legalisation of active voluntary euthanasia as raised at the Senate Inquiry are summarised below, followed by an overview of the current legal situation, in section 3.
When the medical profession becomes involved in killing, the delicate trust relationship between a patient and doctor is undermined. People trust their lives to doctors and health care workers in the knowledge that they are dedicated euthanasia research paper the preservation of life, to healing, to caring.
This after all is the basis of the Hippocratic tradition. The Hippocratic Oath includes the commitment not to kill a patient, even if the patient requests such a course, euthanasia research paper. This is a contested view. Linked to this argument is the role of palliative care. A number of people submitted to the Senate Inquiry that the introduction of voluntary euthanasia would undermine investment in, as well as the role and value placed on, palliative care.
In his evidence to the Senate Inquiry, Assistant Professor Andrew Cole, a palliative care specialist, outlined that providing effective palliative care and support could be an alternative to euthanasia.
He explained:. Rather, it is providing care and support, letting the natural processes take their course and choosing to withdraw therapies that are not reasonable or not helpful. Others argued that the introduction of active voluntary euthanasia would not undermine palliative care but would instead provide an additional option within the palliative care process, euthanasia research paper.
Specifically, the concern is that the legalisation of voluntary euthanasia in terminal cases would then lead euthanasia research paper the practice of other forms of euthanasia such as involuntary euthanasia or voluntary euthanasia in non-terminal cases. That is not voluntary euthanasia. However, euthanasia research paper, many submissions countered this view. For example, Professor Margaret Otlowski argued that:. The most commonly cited objection to the legalisation of active voluntary euthanasia is the 'slippery slope' argument: that the legalisation of active voluntary euthanasia would lead to widespread involuntary euthanasia and the termination of lives no longer considered socially useful.
This is, however, a completely unsubstantiated argument. The 'slippery slope' argument is typically made without regard to the risks of abuse or other problems involved in retaining the present law.
From my understanding, in Oregon they have had this legislation for 17 years and they have done studies which have shown that this slippery slope you are referring to does not exist.
It euthanasia research paper a scaremongering tool used by those who are ideologically opposed to the proposed legislation and who will do anything they can to stop the law.
We in Christians Supporting Choice side with loving compassion and mercy and not with religious dogmatic adherence to a particular point of view There is no slippery slope. Further, there were criticisms that the slippery slope argument, in being focused on the potential for active voluntary euthanasia to lead to other, more controversial forms of euthanasia, did not provide a strong argument against the practice of active voluntary euthanasia itself.
Mr Peter Short, a man with terminal cancer who appeared before the Committee, argued:. Is it rational to take a position of denying the terminally ill and suffering the choice at the end euthanasia research paper their life, because we are concerned we cannot put effective rules around a dying process? We manage road rules, alcohol rules and smoking rules. All are slippery slopes far more difficult and destructive, but all well-accepted in society and in law. Matters involving the most intimate and personal choices a person may make in a life-time are central to the liberty protected by the Fourteenth Amendment.
A number of these moral and ethical concerns are summarised in an excerpt of an article published by Father Frank Brennan:. Many Australians still believe that physician assisted suicide is wrong. While prepared to see a machine turned off, they are opposed to the administration of a lethal injection. They would never seek it for themselves. As health professionals they would never provide such assistance. But should there be a law against the administration of the injection given that many other Australians believe individuals should have a right to choose?
This section will consider the current state of the law within Australia in respect of the regulation of active voluntary euthanasia.
Research proposal- euthanasia
, time: 5:03Legalizing euthanasia or assisted suicide: the illusion of safeguards and controls
1 day ago · Proquest dissertations & theses @ semmelweis university. Pros for euthanasia essay. Essay about a recycling and the summary the research where Part of a paper problems concise of issues conjuguer essayer au conditionnel prsent concise research where problems the the Part a paper of and of issues summary case study on mexico May 20, · Natasha Cica, Euthanasia – the Australian Law in an International Context Part 1: Passive Voluntary Euthanasia, Parliamentary Library Research Paper No 3 (), piii. [11] See, e.g. Queensland Government: Queensland Health, Implementation Guidelines: End-of-life care: Decision-making for withholding and withdrawing life-sustaining measures Feb 09, · Euthanasia is categorized in different ways, which include voluntary, non-voluntary, or involuntary. Euthanasia is also classified into active and passive Euthanasia. Voluntary, Non-Voluntary and Involuntary Euthanasia. Voluntary euthanasia: Euthanasia conducted with the consent of the patient is termed voluntary euthanasia. Voluntary
No comments:
Post a Comment