Euthanasia is a controversial topic in the media at this time. It is subject to extreme argument, which is then presented by the media. Sometimes, individual cases go to court, where a medical practitioner is typically charged with something. This issue requires proper attention, and for more than one reason. Part of understanding it is knowing the death with dignity pros and cons.
Part of the issue's source is that modern medical techniques allow for the protracted survival of terminally ill patients. Some patients survive for years with a condition that would have been lethal in a much shorter time in past eras. Even so, after those years they eventually deteriorate into a near-death state and no further treatment is available. This is when they sometimes request mercy killing, or euthanasia.
Euthanasia is as old as humanity itself and so the controversy around it is not new. Terminating the lives of terminally ill or wounded people is not seen as surprising or even inappropriate. Soldiers do so on the battlefield, and then there are those who give up on their useless medical treatment and commit suicide. There is no novelty about this.
Despite this, the law in most countries does not give medical staff permission to terminate their patients. The rationale behind such laws is self-explanatory. Medical staff cannot be permitted to euthanase patients under their care because they may then terminate those who may well have survived, for whatever reason. The court cases that arise typically revolve around medical personnel who either apply for official permission to euthanase a patient or who have already performed the procedure and are being prosecuted.
One notable recent case concerned Dr Harold Shipman, in the UK. He secretly killed 285 aged patients, without their (or anyone else's) knowledge or even consent. His method was poisoning. Legalizing euthanasia may then encourage medical practitioners with such designs to murder their patients. Shipman was sentenced to jail, where he ended his own life on his 58th birthday.
At present, modern medicine uses lethal injection to conduct euthanasia. This is, of course, also used to execute capital prisoners. The substances used during the procedure are not publicly available and should only be administered by a medical practitioner, since the incorrect dosage of what are sometimes medicinal substances can be fatal in those who are using them for other purposes.
Some patients suffer extreme pain on an everyday basis or they are so incapacitated that they lose enthusiasm for future palliative care. They sometimes resort to less conventional methods, such as self-medicating with illegal street drugs, or they commit suicide through the more common ways. But if they are not able to commit suicide, they ask their treating practitioner to end their lives.
The unresolved debate about mercy killing occupies space in the media and other public discussion forums. At the same time, the patients themselves are committing suicide or organize their own private euthanasia. It is important to place official measures of control on the medical profession, but the terrible symptoms of terminal patients perhaps necessitate exceptions.
Part of the issue's source is that modern medical techniques allow for the protracted survival of terminally ill patients. Some patients survive for years with a condition that would have been lethal in a much shorter time in past eras. Even so, after those years they eventually deteriorate into a near-death state and no further treatment is available. This is when they sometimes request mercy killing, or euthanasia.
Euthanasia is as old as humanity itself and so the controversy around it is not new. Terminating the lives of terminally ill or wounded people is not seen as surprising or even inappropriate. Soldiers do so on the battlefield, and then there are those who give up on their useless medical treatment and commit suicide. There is no novelty about this.
Despite this, the law in most countries does not give medical staff permission to terminate their patients. The rationale behind such laws is self-explanatory. Medical staff cannot be permitted to euthanase patients under their care because they may then terminate those who may well have survived, for whatever reason. The court cases that arise typically revolve around medical personnel who either apply for official permission to euthanase a patient or who have already performed the procedure and are being prosecuted.
One notable recent case concerned Dr Harold Shipman, in the UK. He secretly killed 285 aged patients, without their (or anyone else's) knowledge or even consent. His method was poisoning. Legalizing euthanasia may then encourage medical practitioners with such designs to murder their patients. Shipman was sentenced to jail, where he ended his own life on his 58th birthday.
At present, modern medicine uses lethal injection to conduct euthanasia. This is, of course, also used to execute capital prisoners. The substances used during the procedure are not publicly available and should only be administered by a medical practitioner, since the incorrect dosage of what are sometimes medicinal substances can be fatal in those who are using them for other purposes.
Some patients suffer extreme pain on an everyday basis or they are so incapacitated that they lose enthusiasm for future palliative care. They sometimes resort to less conventional methods, such as self-medicating with illegal street drugs, or they commit suicide through the more common ways. But if they are not able to commit suicide, they ask their treating practitioner to end their lives.
The unresolved debate about mercy killing occupies space in the media and other public discussion forums. At the same time, the patients themselves are committing suicide or organize their own private euthanasia. It is important to place official measures of control on the medical profession, but the terrible symptoms of terminal patients perhaps necessitate exceptions.
0 commentaires:
Enregistrer un commentaire