Margie Whitson's Case

Depending on the individual’s background and religious beliefs, they may wish to be cared for in a specific way, for example CK is Sikh, and therefore her religious beliefs forbid CPR. Her wish is to stay at home and be nursed. After her death she will be treated to a traditional Sikh funeral. The key people in her life are her family who are also Sikh, therefore their beliefs and wishes are the same.

We do agreed there is a dilemma in this case. As the chairman of the ethics committee, I found that the dilemma here is that both the patient as well as the hospital staff are right in their view. A person has the right to choose to die however we cannot make a physician carry out the process. With my understanding, we are all on the same agreement and have been informed with all the information about this dilemma. Dr. Vijay has informed that removing Margie’s pacemaker would violate the ethics principles of justice, beneficence, and non-maleficence. If he followed through with Margie’s request, he would be going against helping others, avoiding or causing damage to patients, and disregarding the risks and benefits of Margie by performing the requested actions. Jane Robison has expressed that doing what Margie has requested would not be good for Margie nor her profession due to the ethics standards that are withheld for all the patients. She believes that with

CNA Code of Ethics for Registered Nurses (2008) provides guidance in dealing with cases like this by explaining the core nursing values and responsibilities involved which are: a) providing safe, compassionate, competent and ethical care; b) promoting health and well-being; c) promoting and respecting informed decision-making, and d) Preserving dignity; e) maintaining confidentiality, f) promoting justice and g) being accountable. The first nursing value is always expected to be upheld in any case because it is their duty to provide care using appropriate safety precautions and preventing/minimizing all forms of violence (CNA, 2008). The collaboration of the nurses between the physician and Mr. C’s family has been evident since then. This therefore calls Mr. C’s nurses to be more compassionate about his situation and try to recognize where he is coming from as they build a trust-worthy relationship before judging him or jumping into conclusions like he does not want to live anymore. Even if he decides to withdraw from these potentially life-sustaining treatments, health care providers are still obliged to give him the care he need the best way they can up until the end of his life. The second nursing value, just like the first one, still calls nurses to still aim to promote or at least maintain Mr. C’s health and well-being to the highest possible level regardless of the path he had chosen for his life. This can be achieved by continuing to collaborate well with other

I think it is the decision of how and went to die should be based on the patient’s morals and ethics. It is their life and their body, so no one should have the right to take that away from them. However, if the person does not have an advance directive, it is the responsibility of the family, friends, and doctors to do exactly what the person would want for themselves. A husband should not be allowed

Patient requested euthanasia is a controversial issue in today's society. As of now, four states have legalized Euthanasia. These states are, Washington, Oregon, California, and Vermont. Furthermore, once euthanasia was legalized in Oregon patient requests rose by 230 percent. Of course, there are complications with euthanasia that make it inconsistent. For example, a man named David Prueitt took the prescribed amount of a lethal drug, but awoke 65 hours later. Moreover, the system of distributing the lethal drugs is flawed. Personally, I believe in a patient’s right to request euthanasia, if done correctly and with overwhelming approval.

These emotional state can be very severe for the patient and their family when learning of this catastrophic news. This is a life changing event for those affected by this news. All the decisions made at this point is never easy decisions for anyone to make. There are Alternative decisions and options for the patients who is suffering. For the case of patients who cannot tolerate constant pain, how would you tell him/her or their family members that their loved ones would need to suffer their last six month or six weeks of their life in debilitating pain? Most times there is already Advance directives in place for the patient who might possibly face these prognosis. Advance directives as defined by the National Institute of Health as a living will, tells which treatments you want if you are dying or permanently unconscious. You can accept or refuse medical care. These are already establish a written document to cease medical treatment or if necessary to have physician assisted euthanasia when patients are in medically irreversible stages. Besides the everyday debilitating painful conditions, the family has to also shoulder the cost of their loved ones soaring medical cost. Not to mention the many families who are forced to use up their life savings, or abandon to pay their mortgages just so their loved ones could be treated with best care possible no matter what the cost. Putting the family in financial hardship will neither help the terminally

There are several arguments that favor active euthanasia. One argument is that it’s appropriate for healthcare professionals create a peaceful environment for death of an individual. A second argument is that people have the right to make their own decisions. Lastly, the remaining arguments consist of laws requiring certain safeguards to regulate the use of active euthanasia. There are several arguments that oppose this practice. The first argument in opposition is that doctor’s primary responsibility is to sustain life and to not cause death. The second argument in opposition is that patients that ill to consider this treatment are not’t mental stable enough to fully give consent. Lastly, the remaining arguments in opposition consist of how deeply this practice will affect the culture of medicine.

The law states that a patient can receive euthanasia if they suffer unbearably from an untreatable physical or psychological medical disorder. To be granted, the patient's request should be explicit and repeated. Furthermore, the patient must be of sound mind, at least one other independent physician must have been consulted, and all alternative treatment options must have been offered.

As an administrator I would need to take into consideration the patient’s autonomy, autonomy is recognizing an individual’s right to make his/her own decisions about what is best for them regarding their health care (Pozgar, 2012). The patient’s rights always should be considered before any decisions are made by any other family members. In this scenario it is clear that the patient is unable to make any decisions, the patient has suffered a serious brain damage, and although it is not complete brain death, we must determine how to proceed.

The case in this ethical and legal issue is quite complicated. Patient is 89 years old; recently lost his wife of 60 years a week ago. He attempted suicide by gunshot and left a note; he admitted that he was too heartbroken to go on. His prognosis even with surgery is not good. However, his big family wants to proceed with the surgery. End-of-life (EOL) care often becomes an issue for a family of dying patient, especially if they cannot make a decision nor have contradictory desires (Blais & Hayes, 2016). Having this patient committed suicide even makes this end-of-life care more complicated. While the case needs to be reported to the authority due to its legal issue, the ethical issue remains.

Should a patient have the right to request doctors to end their life? Those euthanasia supporters will give a definite answer yes, but they overlook the threat behind this "assisted suicide”. Euthanasia, also called mercy killing, is one of the issues in nowadays. Many people say it is easy and should be legalized. Euthanasia is in conflict with most religions and will bring negative influences to the whole society. Therefore it should never be legalized.

Euthanasia is not an acceptable choice of death because it inhibits advancements in medicine. According to Lounge and Complex the requesting doctor told him that “In the past in this situation, I saved it by euthanasia. Now the patient doesn’t want it, and I don’t know what to do. This is my biggest concern in providing euthanasia and setting a norm of euthanasia in medicine: that it will inhibit the

With growing international support, doctors are accepting patient’s requests for active voluntary euthanasia (www.euthanasia.org/ve.html). The American Medical Association (AMA) is well known for their pro-abortion campaigns and funding. Ironically, the AMA funds many hospices and other palliative care centers. They have a firm stand on life. The AMA has initiated the Institute for Ethics, designed to educated physicians on alternative medical approaches to euthanasia during

My great grandfather is not the only person who has hoped for the legalization of euthanasia. There is a substantial amount of people who passed away and in the same excruciating manner. These individuals wish they could go in the way of their choosing, instead of gradually dying in a hospital. Moreover, they want to leave this world with dignity. The legalization of euthanasia or assisted suicide, with the proper safeguards, will help thousands of people who are pleading for their suffering to come to an end. That being said, these measures should be taken with certain precautions and requirements. After the requirements are

Although a medical professional’s job is to save lives, they note the positives in euthanasia to end suffering. However, there could be other reasons. According to Soapboxie, some look at this decision as clearing up space, time, and money for those whose are capable of being saved (1). This is a horrible idea to even cross someone’s mind, but this thought comes around. No life should be taken to clear up time, space, or money. Even though the medical professionals may not directly come out and say this, the patient, in their vulnerable state, could look at it this way. Even though the process is long to attain assisted suicide, the patient may feel as if they must complete this action to stop themselves from being a burden. The patient must generate this decision on their own, but the shape they are in, could truly affect their decision, which is why numerous people find it wrong.