Paper Topic:

`The Don`t-Bother_To-Knock Rule`

Running head : ETHICS

Ethics

Client 's Name

University Affiliation

Ethics

The ethical debate as to the propriety of euthanasia , which was earlier known to be the good death ' had been going on for a long time (MedicineNet , Inc , 2007 . The modern concept of euthanasia now involves the participation of the physician in cutting short the life of a terminally ill patient . Sometimes such actions are not even classified as euthanasia , but as a mere part of decision making in the healthcare setting , more particularly in terminal cases (MedicineNet , Inc , 2007

p The situation described by Stengle is one such case , wherein pulling the plug ' or removal of a person 's life support system is seen as the only way to go (2006 . The terminal and hopeless medical case of Daniel Wayne Cullen II led the hospital 's ethics board to decide against continued life support

In this situation , the common debate would revolve around two positions : Kantian and consequentialist ethics . Between these two ethical theories , the Kantian position is more in favor of life , and is more in accord with humanity

Kantian moral philosophy demands the formulation of the categorical imperative , which is the one moral principle that would ultimately guide all of man 's actions (The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy , 2001 Kantian philosophy does not look at the consequences of the action , but at the reason behind it (The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy , 2001 . On the other hand , consequentialist philosophy , or utlitarianism gauges human action based on the happiness it brings or the pain it causes . Applied in the given situation , the limited number of people to be served by a decision to continue life support would dictate action against it . On the other hand , removing life support could provide several benefits , such as lessened expenses and non-wastage of hospital resources and space

However , it is better to act based on reason , and not based on the contingent allotment of happy feelings . In the given situation , removing life support is approved because the ethics committee has set out standards to help them decide these kinds of situations . Thus , the ethics board had already determined medically that continued life support would be futile (Stengle , 2006

The emotions of the mother would dictate that the consequences of the action be used as basis for decision-making , while the objective point of view of the doctors dictates that the dilemma be resolved through rational weighing of benefits or outcome

The latter course of action can be formulated as a general rule of action in all cases of similar premises . The action would be supported not by feelings and emotions , but by the acceptance that there is nothing in reason to support an action of continued life support

References

MedicineNet , Inc (2007 . Definition of Euthanasia . Retrieved October 10 , 2007 , from http /www .medterms .com /script /main /art .asp ?articlekey 7365

Stengle , J (2006 . Mom Fights to Keep Baby on Life Support . The Christian Post . Retrieved October 10 , 2007 , from http /www .christianpost .com /article /22123...

2 pages

36.5 KB

Free sing-up