Right to Life in the American Medical System

1996 ◽  
Vol 45 (6) ◽  
pp. 1151-1161
Author(s):  
Denis Cavanagh
Keyword(s):  
Public Schools ◽  
Terminal Illness ◽  
Assisted Suicide ◽  
Human Life ◽  
Hippocratic Oath ◽  
Physician Assisted Suicide ◽  
Legalize Abortion ◽  
The Right ◽  
Supreme Court Rulings ◽  
The Impact

The article deals with the impact of the so called “culture of death” on medical practice in United States (US). In fact, in America, while the pretence is being kept up on the importance of the Hippocratic oath and the evangelic benevolence of the Good Samaritan, the strategy of the secular humanists is to try to make these irrelevant in the twin interests of social convenience and fiscal security. This campaign has been quietly waged in the media, in the courts, in public schools and universities. According this strategy, the threats to human life are, namely, two: abortion and euthanasia. On the first issue, in US the situation is discouraging because the US Supreme Court rulings Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton in 1973, that have made abortion a woman’s choice for any reason in the first and second trimester and available with medical consultation for almost any reason in the third trimester of pregnancy. Regarding the euthanasia, the campaign strategy is following the same pattern as that used to legalize abortion: the Euthanasia Lobby is claiming that millions of people in America are suffering unbearable pain because of terminal illness and so ought to have the right to end their pain with physician- assisted suicide. On the contrary, the author assert that there is no right to destroy any human life or participate in its destruction and there is no good moral reason for abortion or euthanasia, including the physician-assisted suicide. Finally, the author think that it is vital that Catholic activists, allied with Christian church-going brethren, should resist with all the power they can muster to the “culture of death”.

scholarly journals Euthanasia and suicide: a medical and social discourse

2021 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 107-112
Author(s):  
V. N. Ostapenko ◽  
I. V. Lantukh ◽  
A. P. Lantukh
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Assisted Suicide ◽  
Human Life ◽  
Modern Science ◽  
Physician Assisted Suicide ◽  
Adequate Quality ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Strong Explosion ◽  
The Right

Annotation. The problem of suicide and euthanasia has been particularly updated with the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic, which caused a strong explosion of suicide, because medicine was not ready for it, and the man was too weak in front of its pressure. The article considers the issue of euthanasia and suicide based on philosophical messages from the position of a doctor, which today goes beyond medicine and medical ethics and becomes one of the important aspects of society. Medicine has achieved success in the continuation of human life, but it is unable to ensure the quality of life of those who are forced to continue it. In these circumstances, the admission of suicide or euthanasia pursues the refusal of the subject to achieve an adequate quality of life; an end to suffering for those who find their lives unacceptable. The reasoning that banned suicide: no one should harm or destroy the basic virtues of human nature; deliberate suicide is an attempt to harm a person or destroy human life; no one should kill himself. The criterion may be that suicide should not take place when it is committed at the request of the subject when he devalues his own life. According to supporters of euthanasia, in the conditions of the progress of modern science, many come to the erroneous opinion that medicine can have total control over human life and death. But people have the right to determine the end of their lives while using the achievements of medicine, as well as the right to demand an extension of life with the help of the same medicine. They believe that in the era of a civilized state, the right to die with medical help should be as natural as the right to receive medical care. At the same time, the patient cannot demand death as a solution to the problem, even if all means of relieving him from suffering have been exhausted. In defense of his claims, he turns to the principle of beneficence. The task of medicine is to alleviate the suffering of the patient. But if physician-assisted suicide and active euthanasia become part of health care, theoretical and practical medicine will be deprived of advances in palliative and supportive therapies. Lack of adequate palliative care is a medical, ethical, psychological, and social problem that needs to be addressed before resorting to such radical methods as legalizing euthanasia.

To be or Not to Be: Assisted Suicide Revisited

1995 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 221-235 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth W. Markson
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Values ◽  
Terminal Illness ◽  
Assisted Suicide ◽  
Financial Burden ◽  
Consumer Price Index ◽  
Historical Context ◽  
Physician Assisted Suicide ◽  
American Physician ◽  
Great Pain ◽  
The Right

Publicity accorded American physician-pathologist Jack Kevorkian and “physician-assisted suicide” bring a new, technological, twist to euthanasia. How and when we die and its meaning and how we live reflect cultural values within a historical context. High costs of medical care for the terminally ill when the cost of health care is the most rapidly rising portion of the consumer price index, Medicare expenses are the highest in the last year of life, and an estimated thirty-seven million people remain uninsured make euthanasia increasingly salient. Faced with great pain and the emotional and financial burden that often accompanies prolongation of life during terminal illness, the decision to die is not necessarily irrational, psychotic, or delusional but pragmatic. Yet inherent risks have often been overlooked in discussions of “the right to die.” This article reviews cultural values associated with beliefs about assisted suicide, the experience of other nations including the Nether; lands with assisted suicide, and the “slippery slopes” inherent in legitimization of physician-assisted suicide.

Terminal Sedation: Palliative Care for Intractable Pain, Post Glucksberg and Quill

2003 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-76
Author(s):  
Rob McStay
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Assisted Suicide ◽  
Life Support ◽  
Intractable Pain ◽  
Terminal Sedation ◽  
Physician Assisted Suicide ◽  
The Right ◽  
Artificial Life Support ◽  
Unconscious State

In 1997, the U.S. Supreme Court tacitly endorsed terminal sedation as an alternative to physician-assisted suicide, thus intensifying a debate in the legal and medical communities as to the propriety of terminal sedation and setting the stage for a new battleground in the “right to die” controversy. Terminal sedation is the induction of an unconscious state to relieve otherwise intractable distress, and is frequently accompanied by the withdrawal of any life-sustaining intervention, such as hydration and nutrition. This practice is a clinical option of “last resort” when less aggressive palliative care measures have failed. Terminal sedation has also been described as “the compromise in the furor over physician-assisted suicide.”Medical literature suggests that terminal sedation was a palliative care option long before the Supreme Court considered the constitutional implications of physician-assisted suicide. Terminal sedation has been used for three related but distinct purposes: (1) to relieve physical pain; (2) to produce an unconscious state before the withdrawal of artificial life support; and (3) to relieve non-physical suffering.

scholarly journals Tipologi Penindakan Kejahatan Korporasi Dalam Korupsi Dana Bantuan Pandemi Covid-19

2021 ◽  
Vol 24 (01) ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Michelle Kristina
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Corporate Responsibility ◽  
Qualitative Methodology ◽  
Human Life ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Assistance Program ◽  
Community Activities ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Impact

The development of human life nowadays cannot be separated from various aspects such as economy, politics, and technology, including the impact of the coronavirus outbreak (Covid-19 or SARS-CoV-2) which emerged at the end of 2019. Responding to this Covid-19 pandemic outbreak In Indonesia, the government has issued various policies as measures to prevent and handle the spread of Covid-19. One of these policies is to limit community activities. These restrictions have implications for the fulfilment of the economic needs of the affected communities. Responding to the urgency of this community's economic situation, the government held a social assistance program as a measure to ease the community's economic burden. However, the procurement of the program was used as a chance for corruption involving the Ministry of Social Affairs and corporations as the winning bidders. This study uses a qualitative methodology with a normative juridical approach and literature. The approach is carried out by conducting a juridical analysis based on a case approach. The results of the study show that the corporations involved cannot be separated from corporate responsibility. However, the criminal liability process against the corporation is deemed not to reflect justice for the current situation of Indonesia is experiencing. The crime was not carried out in a normal situation but in a situation when Indonesia was trying hard to overcome the urgent situation, the Covid-19 pandemic. Corporate crimes committed by taking advantage of the pandemic situation are deemed necessary to prioritize special action or the weight of criminal acts committed by corporations. The weighting of criminal sanction is the right step as a law enforcement process for corporate crimes during the pandemic.

scholarly journals Dua Sisi Gelap Covid-19 : Dilematis Antara Keterbukaan Data Identitas Penderita Covid-19 Dan Transparansi Data Publik Dalam Rangka Menekan Stigmatisasi

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 73-85
Author(s):  
Yohanes Firmansyah ◽  
Imam Haryanto
Keyword(s):  
Information Disclosure ◽  
Human Life ◽  
Psychological Impact ◽  
Health Economy ◽  
Privacy Rights ◽  
Right To Privacy ◽  
The Right To Privacy ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Relationship

The Covid-19 case has had a huge influence on all aspects of human life, starting from health, economy, sosial, law, and many more. The COVID-19 pandemic has caused various frictions between various interests, one of which is a clash between individual interests and community interests. One of the obvious things about this problem is regarding the impact of COVID-19 in the field of sociology, especially the relationship between individuals, especially the issue of community stigmatization regarding infectious diseases, the dilemma between the privacy rights of the identity of COVID-19 patients and the disclosure of publik data on COVID-19 patients with various risks will injure and cause multiple material and immaterial losses. On the other hand, Covid-19 also raises various sosial-psychological problems and legal problems that still do not regulate all aspects of human life. This paper describes the sociological elements of COVID-19, the right to privacy, publik information disclosure, and the sosial-psychological impact of COVID-19, along with a juridical review of the right to privacy and publik disclosure of information regarding the transparency of COVID-19.

scholarly journals THE PRINCIPLE OF QUALITY OF LIFE VERSUS SANCTITY OF LIFE IN THE EUTHANASIA DEBATE: WHERE DOES ISLAMIC LAW STANDS?

2012 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Omipidan Bashiru Adeniyi
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Terminal Illness ◽  
Assisted Suicide ◽  
Islamic Law ◽  
The Other ◽  
Western World ◽  
Sanctity Of Life ◽  
World Today ◽  
The Right

The trend in most part of the western world today is the agitations for a person to have the right to take his own life, when such life, becomes unbearable due to pain, being the result of a severe or terminal illness. This is the position of proponents of the concept of euthanasia and assisted suicide. Opponents of the concept on the other hand are of the view that no matter the circumstances, a person should not take his own life because he has contributed nothing to its creation. They therefore uphold the sanctity of life as against its quality. This paper seeks to examine the relative arguments and will address the position of Islamic law governing the euthanasia debate.

AMA Reconsiders Opposition to Physician-Assisted Suicide

2016 ◽  
Vol 41 (10) ◽  
pp. 1-3
Author(s):  
Ralph A. Capone ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Annual Meeting ◽  
Assisted Suicide ◽  
Code Of Ethics ◽  
Medical Profession ◽  
Human Life ◽  
The United States ◽  
Physician Assisted Suicide ◽  
Judicial Affairs ◽  
Aid In Dying ◽  
Recent Edition

In 1847, the American Medical Association established the first professional code of ethics for physicians in the United States. Expanded over the years to meet the needs of the medical profession, its most recent edition, adopted in 2016, includes a statement of AMA principles of medical ethics and eleven sets of opinions on various topics. After 169 years of opposition to physician involvement in directly causing patients’ deaths, the AMA is considering a change in its position—a position that has always averred the sacredness of every human life, asserting that the physician’s role is to cure when possible, care always, and ultimately err on the side of protecting and preserving human life. Following its annual meeting this past June, the AMA House of Delegates recommended that the Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs study aid-in-dying as an end-of- life option and report back at the annual meeting in 2017.

Szasz, suicide, and medical ethics

Thomas Szasz ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 55-64
Author(s):  
George J. Annas
Keyword(s):  
Mental Illness ◽  
Informed Consent ◽  
Suicide Prevention ◽  
Assisted Suicide ◽  
Physician Assisted Suicide ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Right ◽  
Suicidal Patients ◽  
Commit Suicide

Szasz objected to the medicalization of suicide, the legalization of suicide prevention, and especially the coercive role of psychiatry in this realm. He declared that, by medicalizing suicide, we banish the subject from discussion. What is meant by acceptable and unacceptable “suicide”? Who has a right to commit suicide? How does suicide implicate freedom? Does it reflect abortion jurisprudence? How do psychiatrists become suicide’s gatekeepers? Current phenomena (e.g., new physician-assisted suicide legislation) illuminate these and other issues (e.g., euthanasia, informed consent, informed refusal, the “right to die,”), all suggesting how Szasz would react to each. Suicide is legal, but is almost always considered a result of mental illness. Courts approve psychiatrists who want to commit “suicidal” patients involuntarily. Granting physicians prospective legal immunity for prescribing lethal drugs is, at best, a strange and tangential reaction to our inability to discuss suicide (and dying) rationally. Szasz got it right.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document