Euthanasia or Assisted Dying Issues - Essay Example

? Introduction In looking at the case of Terry Schiavo was a legalized struggle that had to with long life support in the United States that occurred from the year of 1990 to the year of 2005. It is important to highlight that the case here was on the following of the strategies of the stopping the support of her life. This was a decision that was made by the husband. According to the doctors’ diagnosis, they said that their test proved that she was under a persistent vegetative condition. It is noted that while in her home St Petersburg, she collapsed. The reports about her are known that Terry suffered from cardiac arrest that was the cause of her death. She suffered from a condition that was so much in the heart (Daniel 2012). The deficiency of oxygen led to her big brain devastation or rather brain damage and thereafter the doctors vindicated that she suffered from vegetative state. The deficiency resulted from the heart malfunction that she developed so there was no proper intake of oxygen by the required blood vessel that is originating from the heart. The doctors’ report was after they had conducted several tests on her. The doctors were quite optimistic and hoped for the best for her. They tried several types of therapy ranging from speech and physical therapy as well as other experimental therapies. They thought that they would bring her back into a normal mental state. When the years passed by until 1998, Michael the husband to Terry filed a case in court for the removal of the feeding tube that was being used in the administration of food to his wife (David 2008). This was a petition that was highly rejected so much by the parents, who reasoned and maintained a firm stand that their daughter was not mentally ill. The court again came in with their own ascertainment that Terry does not prefer to continue with the exercises that are making her life longer. The feeding tube was then taken away from her and later put back. When the judge from Pinellas County made a ruling that the feeding tube removed from the patient, many voices came up from many parts such as the federal government that obliged the then president George Bush to ascent to another law just to prolong her life. This was a sign in which they valued the loss of a life. Many should emulate this kind of valuation. Life is a special gift from God and it should therefore be valued and kept ablaze like the Lord provided it (Donna 2010). It is important to note that the utilitarian has to do with getting the best out of a situation. It is also important to highlight that utilitarianism is all about getting the best from joy and happiness while you are suppressing the plights. The utilitarian position in this case of Terry Schiavo is that there was a rescue mission to save her from dying. In the case, there was a lot of thinking on how to maximize the utility. When she was put in the life support and the feeding tube used, there was the maximization of life as her life was prolonged. There was the removal of the feeding tube from the patient kind of led o the shortening of the life of Terry (George 2010). Again it is as well important to note that the action that was conducted to Terry was objective and the outcome was s ell meant to be on the positive end to Terry and her husband. I am therefore on the defending of the utilitarian act that was conducted to the patient. The principle of double effect in its stating says that a good exercise or action is dimensional. In the case of the patient, Terry, the principle was quite ideal as it authorized and allowed for the performance of the euthanasia for the good of Terry Schiavo. The action was morally accepted because its outcome was to do with saving life and not losing. The doctors had full knowledge on the action as they are the experts in the medical field (Janie 2012). It is important to highlight that the metaphysical presuppositions that underlie my approach in the case of Terry here are so broad. Considering the normal human assumptions, it is always known that the human life is in the hands of the Lord. The Lord has all the control of the human life and therefore no matter how much you try to keep somebody alive, the rite of passage, death will still take its role. Life supporting machines can never keep a person alive forever. Another metaphysical presupposition to this approach basing my argument on the mind now is that the providing parties who are the experts in this field can use this to play tricks and prank people yet the client had passed on long time. It is therefore suitable if the parties involved show all the relevant information to the victims and the public as a whole such that they are rest assured that their person is alive and it is not their money that is being utilized indirectly (Lois 2009). The social impact of the national commitment to the prolonging of the lives of individuals who are in the dying state and vegetative state to mention is great to the society. The impacts are both on the positive end as well as the negative ends too. The people in the society will be able to see their people for long than they expected. This can make the lucky ones to survive and actually live for long and may heal in turn. The sick or rather the affected will be able to write their wills before they pass on and tell all that they had to better the lives of their loved ones who they will leave behind (David 2008). Another positive side to the society is that the cost of putting people in the machines will be subsidized or fully under the control of the government. This therefore means that the people will not be spending on the care of their people but even if they will spend, then the cost will not be that much. This will therefore make the society to keep up in terms of the development programs that were underway. However, spending and dedicating time to these people as a nation will adversely affect the society to some extent. Too much concentration on the people will make the society to lose focus and this will therefore drag the society behind. The economy will again be insufficient of funds to run other projects in the society. Again, when these people are put in the forefront so much, there will be struggle for resources in the society (Daniel 2012). It is important to highlight that the people that are involved in the euthanasia process have various rights that have to be acknowledged by everybody. Just like other people, they have the right to live and so their rights cannot be terminated by some malpractices terminating their lives will therefore be a violation of their right of living. This is the reason why in the case study of Terry, when there was an order from the court about the removal of the feeding tube from the patient in question, there were several voices that came to rescue Terry because living I her right. Another right that they have is the right to protection. When there was again the same order from the court for the removal of the feeding tube and even when the husband also wanted it removed, the family of Terry came up raised their voice for her to be with the feeding tube for they valued her life and never wanted to lose her. The president again made legislation just to let her continue being in the life supporting machine with the aid of the feeding tubes to prolong her life (Donna 2010). It is also important to highlight that the people in the dying state have needs that they need to be attended to. These needs range from love to their basic necessities. These people are not dead but they are just unconscious. They therefore require and need to be cleaned, provided with food and properly clothed. Their needs are to be tended to just like the others. And even the environment that they undergo the medication, there should be proper and high level of hygiene that is maintained and security accorded to them. They also have their interests that they would wish if they could be in an able position to. Their key points of interest have to be well looked at so that they do not further develop mental complications in the vegetative state (David 2008). The other parties that are involved in here are the doctors providing the service. Their interests and needs as well have to be looked at. The main interest is to rescue the person but finances and the payment must be made so this is an area that is of their interest so much. They should therefore not be left to work and to not get their payments and even if they do then it is petty, they will be demoralized so much and they will change the quality of the service they provide (Lois 2009). It is important to note that these kinds of states occur to anybody. In any case or by chance it occurs to me or somebody that I care for so much, the outcome that I would prefer is that the person recovers to the original state of health for the fear of losing a loved one. The action that I would prefer is the euthanasia to help avert the loss of the loved one. It is important to note that losing a loved one not only draws the family back but it affects socially, politically and economically. I would thus not wish to lose a loved one (Donna 2010). References Daniel K. God’s own party: The making of the Christian right, Oxford University Press,2012 David C. Fighting for dear life: The untold stories of Terry Schiavo, UK, Baker books publishers, 2008 Donna K. Health Care Management and the Law: Principles and Applications engages students who will be leading and shaping twenty-first century health care, Cengage learning publishers, 2010 George J. Worst case bioethics: Death disaster and public health, Oxford University Press, 2010 Janie B. Nursing Ethics: Across the Curriculum and Into Practice,Boston, Jones & Bartlett publishers, 2012 Lois L. If that ever happens to me: Making life and death decisions, University of North Carolina, 2009 Read More