check attachment for instuction
EUTHANASIA 3
Euthanasia
Olawoyin Ibitoye
Chamberlain University
PHIL347
Professor Oakes
09/05/2021
Topic: Euthanasia
Recently, the number of cases highlighting the need to change laws and legislation about euthanasia has increased rapidly, increasing the need to study euthanasia. Euthanasia refers to the process of terminating a person’s life to relieve them from pain or end their suffering. Perceptions towards euthanasia have changed despite the existing controversy about the moral perspective of the entire process. The rationale behind euthanasia topic is to understand the ethical issues surrounding euthanasia. Euthanasia presents the ethical problem of whether or not people have the right to choose when and how to end their lives. The main issue is that euthanasia is unethical and should be prohibited because it is against the sanctity of life, violates autonomy and human rights, demeans the role of palliative care, and undermines the doctor-patient relationship.
Firstly, euthanasia contradicts the sanctity of life. Human life is sacred, and nothing or no one has the right to take it other than the giver of life (Hurn and Badman-King, 2019). Life is considered a gift from God, and He alone has the power to end it through natural death. As such, human life should be respected and preserved. The sanctity of life in every human being is recognized by allowing terminally ill patients to die a natural death. Suffering is part of human life, and using euthanasia to relieve patients from suffering deprives them of the human dignity and sanctity of life.
Secondly, euthanasia is unethical because it abuses personal autonomy and human rights. Every person has the freedom to choose whatever is best for them, including accepting suffering and pain. Involuntary euthanasia deprives patients of the freedom to decide when and how to end their life (Balynska, Blahuta, and Sereda, 2019). Human beings have an inherent right to life as stipulated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Terminating a person’s life without their consent denies them the right to live and die naturally.
Thirdly, euthanasia is unethical because it undermines the doctor-patient relationship. The primary role of a physician is to help and save patients from pain. Administering drugs to terminate patients’ lives undermines the medical professions’ role and portrays doctors as murderers (Yorova and Khakberdiyeva, 2021). Patients built trust and confidence in care providers’ role of relieving them from pain. The use of euthanasia breaks patients’ trust in the care providers’ ability to take care of terminally ill patients.
Euthanasia is indeed a controversial topic mainly due to the
4
Euthanasia
Olawoyin Ibitoye
Professor Oakes
Chamberlain university
09/19/2021
Euthanasia
Euthanasia Review
Euthanasia is defined as the practice of killing a patient to limit their suffering. The physician causes the death of the patient from an incurable or severe condition. The life termination exercise may involve injection with drugs to induce coma by a doctor and stop the heart from operating. Euthanasia takes place in a medical facility in the presence of medical staff. It slightly differs from physician-assisted suicide (PAS), which refers to the “prescription of lethal medication be voluntarily self-administered by the patient.” Euthanasia causes intentional death. Multiple perceptions surround euthanasia. Some people think the process is illegal, while others believe it is better to end suffering after mutual agreement between the patient and the physicians. Mixed reactions erupt from euthanasia as people try to understand the ethical and legal issues surrounding the exercise. The dilemma emanates from whether people should decide whether to live or die (Balynska et al., 2019). Therefore, this essay argues both sides of euthanasia and identifies which side is stronger and more persuasive than the other.
Pros of Euthanasia
Euthanasia terminates patient’s suffering and relieves their people from mental, psychological, and financial strains. Euthanasia offers a quality dying experience and is used as the last resort when all other options fail. Instead of waiting for the patient to die in lengthy pain, the physicians decide to end their lives more comfortably without pain. People should dictate their lives, whether to die or live; thus should choose to die if they cannot withstand pain or incurable diseases. Euthanasia enables the patients to end the guilty of burdening their caregivers. Patients may feel ashamed of their status and dependence on people thus decides to undertake euthanasia because they believe death will still happen either way.
Cons of Euthanasia
Euthanasia contradicts the sanctity of life. Religiously, life is sovereign, and only God should take it from human beings. Euthanasia abuses human rights to life thus considered unethical. Patients often decide to undertake the exercise under emotional influence and may regret it if given another chance to be alive. Euthanasia may undermine the doctor-patient relationship because physicians focus on saving lives, but the patient may demand to undergo euthanasia to end their suffering. Euthanasia is unethical and should be considered illegal because it undermines human life and dignity. Euthanasia gives too much power to doctors and exposes the vulnerable to pressure to end their lives. Lega
1
Annotated Bibliography
Olawoyin Ibitoye
Professor Oakes
Chamberlain University
PHIL347N-11405
10/03/2021
Euthanasia
Thesis: Although treatment can be considered futile in some situations, the practice of euthanasia undermines the quality of life and healthcare as the role of healthcare providers is to protect life rather than destroy it.
Euthanasia grants authority to health practitioners to make decisions about a patient’s right to life. This diminishes the trust placed on health practitioners as it undermines the quality of life. In addition, the practice is unethical as it undermines the cultural beliefs of patients, thus reducing the quality of care. The nurses’ code of ethics requires nurses to protect patients from harm and death can be considered patient harm, which should then be avoided. Proponents of the practice argue that euthanasia offers a way out of chronic pain and suffering through assisted suicide. This could be true as treating uncurable pain and suffering can be futile and costly causing more pain to patient and family members. However, that does not justify disrespecting human dignity.
Annotated Bibliography
Balynska, O. M., Blahuta, R. I., & Sereda, V. V. (2019). Euthanasia or palliative care: legal principles of the implementation in the context of the realization of human rights to life (Scopus).
Part 1
The article argues that “the right to life is a natural inherent human right, the fundamental principle of the existence of mankind, recognized by all civilized countries.” Balynska et al. (2019) analyzed and systematized existing problems of the legalization of euthanasia. The authors question euthanasia legalization because they believe its risks outweigh the benefits. They studied the legalities of euthanasia based on the value of human life and preferred palliative care over euthanasia. The authors confirm the objective absence of euthanasia legalization procedure and argue that it is a direct violation of human rights to life. The article suggests the adoption of palliative care as an alternative for euthanasia.
Part 2
The source is current, and it discusses euthanasia issues and cases as they have recently been witnessed. The source is credible because it is scholarly and published on a peer-reviewed website (Google Scholar). The source strongly provides evidence of palliative care as a recommendable alternative for euthanasia analyzing people’s opinions, and the actual harm euthanasia causes to the parties involved. The information is persuasive in nature because it explains issues as they occur naturally and demonstrates public opinion towards euthanasia.
Hurn, S.,
Required Resources
Read/review the following resources for this activity:
· Textbook: Chapter 15
· Lesson
· Completed Week 5 Source Evaluation Worksheet (included annotated bibliography)
· Minimum of 5 scholarly sources
Introduction
This week, all the hard work you have done in researching your topic and issue will come to fruition in your argumentative paper. Once you feel you have got the final draft, try to put the paper aside, even for a few hours, and then read it again.
· Did you address at least three aspects of the issue you chose?
· Does each aspect have relevant and authoritative evidence in support of your point?
· Have you included a view that is in opposition to your viewpoint, and have you answered that opposing view, pointing out its flaws in such a way as to refute it?
Edit your paper – look for wordiness, repetition, vagueness, ambiguities. Check the organization of the paper as a whole; make sure each paragraph maintains focus. After you are satisfied that the content of your paper is good, carefully proofread it and correct mechanical errors.
Here is a brief breakdown of the project so that you can plan your time in the course:
|
Week |
Task |
|
Week 1 |
Topic Selection |
|
Week 3 |
Issue Review (both sides) |
|
Week 5 |
Thesis & Annotated Bibliography (both sides) |
|
Week 7 |
Argumentative Paper |
Instructions
This week, you will complete your argumentative paper. Following the directions in assigned textbook reading on how write an argumentative essay on the issue you chose in Week 1. Be sure your essay contains the following:
· An opening paragraph that states a clear thesis that is focused, plausible, and arguable and that gives direction and purpose to the paper
· A fair-minded, balanced, and objective development of the pros and cons of the issue in a well-organized sequence of ideas, free of mechanical errors
· Credible, reliable, and authoritative evidence in support of the points made
· A strong conclusion that summarizes your views, reminds the audience of the issue and its importance, and shows in brief that you have successfully defended your thesis
Note
As you do your research, it is permissible to change your sources. Also, because of the recency and relevance of these issues, no sources older than 5 years should be used other than as historical information. Critical thinkers do the research first and then side with the preponderance of evidence. You might want to follow that principle.
W7 Course Project Grading Rubric – 185 pts
|
W7 Course Project Grading Rubric – 185 pts |
|||||||
|
Criteria |
Ratings |
Pts |
|||||
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeLength |
|
5 pts |
|||||
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePurpose & Focus |
|
10 pts |
|||||
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeQuality of Research/Evidence |
|
