JAG Number:
Euthanasia refers to the termination of life of an individual, for the purpose of ending their medical suffering. Doctors have the mandate to perform the act depending on the situation, but the numerous debates regarding the subject bring out total confusion on what is right or wrong. The act may be voluntary or involuntary depending on the state of the sick patient. Physicians often encounter the dilemma of upholding morals and ethical values, because the act of ending the life of a person is a crime according to the law.
The term euthanasia traces its roots from Greece, where it is a combination of two Greek words eu and Thanatos, meaning good and death respectively. The case against the doctor and two nurses who injected Hurricane Katrina victims with morphine so as to end their lives raised many questions regarding the morality and ethical beliefs of the doctor.
In an interview, the doctor explained that she was not a believer of euthanasia, but she felt compelled to perform it upon seeing the situation of the patients. Some were extremely ill with almost no chances of survival, while others were completely incapacitated to be moved to better facilities for further treatment (McNamara, 2007). In her defense, the doctor explained that her intentions were to end the patients’ suffering, but not to kill them.
Euthanasia can be active, passive, voluntary or involuntary. Active euthanasia is where a physician takes the initiative to give a suffering patient a peaceful death by administering a dose of medication that they are well aware will cause eventual death. An example is the administration of morphine injections to the suffering patients by a doctor in the Hurricane Katrina case. It was also non-voluntary because the patients were in no position to dictate what action should have occurred in their situation. That kind of euthanasia is subject to the consent from people around the patients; family or a physician, as to whether it is the right thing to do.
Passive euthanasia occurs when a physician stops giving a patient medication at their request. The patient does not receive any coercion to take that step, but decides independently on what should be done to them. The United States does give individuals the right to decide what should be done to them, and, therefore, carrying out this type of euthanasia gets seen as a sign of respect for those who request it. Debates have risen regarding this issue because death is not the main intent of this practice, but gets foreseen as a possibility. Hence, it is difficult to classify it as euthanasia or an act of killing (Norman, 2012).
Voluntary euthanasia is that which a patient may decide to write a statement before being sick, requesting not to be on life support in the event that they go into a vegetative state. The case, on the doctor and the two nurses on the hurricane Katrina incident, has raised many questions regarding the ethical and legal positions of their actions. Many religious and legal entities may not agree with the actions of these medical practitioners simply because euthanasia happens to be an act of killing, and killing is punishable by law. A patient’s capability to give a go ahead on certain health issues gets determined professionally by the medical practitioner, who can conclude that the capability is temporary or stable.
A court order gets issued, upon determining the competency of the practitioner, for a designated decision maker to speak on behalf of the patient. The decision maker may be the family members or even a medical practitioner (Brock & Mastroianni, 2013). In the Hurricane Katrina case, the doctor did not seek legal counsel before administering the morphine to the patient; instead, she made a judgment based on the situation at hand. The disaster was severe, and the conditions would not provide room for consultation.
A human being has feelings and emotions, and in my opinion, the doctor took that step. She did that because she thought it was only fair to end the patients’ suffering by giving a painless alternative. Rather than watch them die a slow and agonizing death; because from her judgment, they would not survive, she decided to end their suffering.
The issue of euthanasia is controversial because different people have different views regarding the morality of the practice. No matter the situation of the patient, euthanasia is an act of killing, which is wrong, and its justification may contradict the value of human life. Numerous questions have sprung up, and arguments have come up. The practice may mean to serve a positive purpose, but again, legalizing it may pose a risk of misuse or even disguising actual crimes.
References
Brock, L. V. & Mastroianni, A. (2013). Clinical Ethics and Law. Ethics in Medicine Online, University of Washington School of Medicine, Department of Bioethics & Humanities. Retrieved from http://depts.washington.edu/bioethx/topics/law.html
McNamara, M. (2007, June 20). Deals in Katrina Euthanasia Case? CBS News. Retrieved from http://www.cbsnews.com/news/deals-in-katrina-euthanasia-case/
Norman, G. V. (2012). The Ethics of Ending Life: Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide, Part 1: The Language of Ending Life. CSA Bulletin, 61(1), 78-82. Retrieved from http://www.csahq.org/pdf/bulletin/end_of_life_61_1.pdf
