The writer is very fast, professional and responded to the review request fast also. Thank you.
Discussion post 1
Though it hasn’t always been the case, there is now a well-recognized right of patients to refuse medical treatment. This includes treatments that the patient thinks are too risky, but also treatments they oppose for any other reason they might have. It includes also the right to stop treatment, because patients must feel free to withdraw existing treatments or else they might refrain from starting a treatment in the first place for fear that they won’t be allowed to change their mind later.
A major issue for us, as we consider healthcare in end-of-life situations, is whether we should see euthanasia and assisted suicide as ethically comparable to respecting patient wishes to stop/refuse treatment even when doing so means they’lll die when they could have lived by continuing treatment.
So the question is: are passive euthanasia (letting a patient die when they request to stop treatment) and active euthanasia (taking steps to kill a patient when they request it) ethically the same? The conventional doctrine on this question is No, they are ethically different. But James Rachels and other ethicists challenge this. What do you think?
———–
reading questions—
answer questions based on articles below and attachments
What does James Rachels identify as conventional wisdom (or the standard view) of the ethics of passive and active euthanasia? Does Rachels himself agree with this?
2. What sort of moral lesson is Rachels trying to draw from his hypothetical Smith-Jones scenario?
3. Why might someone see withdrawing treatment as ethically different from withholding treatment? Why might someone see withdrawing and withholding treatment as ethically equivalent?
4. Which of the principles of bioethics would you say is most central to Dax Cowart’s position on the right to refuse treatment? Briefly explain.
5. Identify the eligibility requirements for physician assisted suicide under the Death with Dignity Act.
6. Do you have any ethical criticisms or concerns about the Death with Dignity Act? Would you vote to adopt it as the law in Illinois – why or why not?
articles ::
https://deathwithdignity.org/resources/faqs/
https://www.vanityfair.com/magazine/1991/05/jack-kevorkian199105
Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.
You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.
Read moreEach paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.
Read moreThanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.
Read moreYour email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.
Read moreBy sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.
Read more