NSG/426: Integrity In Practice: Ethic And Legal Considerations

NSG/426: Integrity In Practice: Ethic And Legal Considerations.

I’m working on a Nursing question and need guidance to help me study.

Save your time - order a paper!

Get your paper written from scratch within the tight deadline. Our service is a reliable solution to all your troubles. Place an order on any task and we will take care of it. You won’t have to worry about the quality and deadlines

Order Paper Now

Summarize the decision-making model you employed, and the process used to arrive at your position on why you agree or disagree with Euthanasia and assisted suicide.

Summarize and explain each person’s position and evidence.

Explain how seeing the positions and evidence of others changed or reinforced your position.

Format your assignment as one of the following:

  • 12 slide presentation (this includes a title and an APA-formatted reference slide).

Cite at least 3 peer-reviewed sources published within the last 5 years that support your positions.

Dione Hendrix (My personal response)

5/30/20, 7:36 AM

Top of Form

As medical care providers, the concept of euthanasia represents a major dilemma. Based on the Hippocratic oath, we should avoid doing harm to any patient. Even so, the real question relies on the fact that sometimes keeping that patient alive can actually do more harm than good. Thus, I agree with the concept of euthanasia but only in specific and strict circumstances. The debate over the morality and legality of voluntary euthanasia is a phenomenon that manifested itself, especially in the twentieth century. The first attempts to legalize euthanasia were recorded at the beginning of this century in some industrialized countries (England, the United States, and Germany), in parallel with the creation of pro-euthanasia associations. In 1903, about a thousand physicians from the American Medical Association called for euthanasia for patients with cancer, tuberculosis, and paralysis. This further confirms the interest of society towards this aspect and the necessity of implementing it but only under strict considerations (Abohaimed et al ,2019).

The problem of euthanasia raises, first of all, questions of a religious and ethical nature. People’s attitudes toward euthanasia are usually determined by their view of life and death. Social and political considerations are also at stake. Our social relationships are largely determined by the fact that we are not allowed to intentionally kill another person, just as a society protects us from being killed. The following question logically arises: “What will happen if we give up this protection?” (Golingher et al,2017). The central ethical argument of the proponents of voluntary euthanasia is that respect for any person should automatically impose respect for the choices he or she makes. This argument is directly related to the concept of autonomy and self-control. People generally make important decisions about their lives according to how they want to live their lives. Exercising their autonomy, they take responsibility for their own lives and, implicitly, for the way they want to die. Most of the reasons for people’s worries about death are less about the fear of suffering than the desire to die without losing their dignity and control over their own lives. Because of that, it can be stated that legalizing euthanasia will offer the patient a sense of knowing what is going to happen to him or her (Inbadas et al,2017).

Nevertheless, it can relieve the unbearable suffering of those in the cause. Terminal illnesses can be painful and can drastically influence the quality of life. In some situations, it can reach a state which is so bad that the patient no longer describes it as living. Thus, in this situation, it is the patient’s right to die. By relieving his or her suffering, euthanasia can also relieve the burden of the relatives who have to assist the patient with daily activities (Simmons,2018). Euthanasia offers the patient the possibility to die with dignity without having their image affected. Even though this might sound like a joke, for patients with terminal illnesses it can mean a lot. Thus, I agree with euthanasia, but I would focus on making sure that it is applied only to people who really need it and that they are well informed of their decision and the consequences it yields.

References

Abohaimed, S., Matar, B., Al-Shimali, H., Al-Thalji, K., Al-Othman, O., Zurba, Y., & Shah, N. (2019). Attitudes of Physicians towards Different Types of Euthanasia in Kuwait. Medical principles and practice : international journal of the Kuwait University, Health Science Centre, 28(3), 199–207. https://doi.org/10.1159/000497377

Goligher, E. C., Ely, E. W., Sulmasy, D. P., Bakker, J., Raphael, J., Volandes, A. E., Patel, B. M., Payne, K., Hosie, A., Churchill, L., White, D. B., & Downar, J. (2017). Physician-Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia in the ICU: A Dialogue on Core Ethical Issues. Critical care medicine, 45(2), 149–155. https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000001818

Inbadas, H., Zaman, S., Whitelaw, S., & Clark, D. (2017). Declarations on euthanasia and assisted dying. Death studies, 41(9), 574–584. https://doi.org/10.1080/07481187.2017.1317300

Simmons K. M. (2018). Suicide and Death with Dignity. Journal of law and the biosciences, 5(2), 436–439. https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsy008

Hunter Stoebe Response:

Top of Form

Assisted suicide and euthanasia in healthcare are ethical debates that have taken place for many years. It is understandable that when a human life is placed into the hands of another, conflict will inevitably arise. In my opinion, patients should be given the autonomy and respect to make their own decisions regarding end-of-life care. We, as healthcare providers, cannot feel their pain. It seems cruel to prolong their suffering in a situation where death is imminent and looming in their near future. The American College of Physicians stated that arguments supporting physician-assisted suicide viewed it as, “an act of compassion that respects patient choice and fulfills an obligation of nonabandonment (Sulmasy, Snyder, & Mueller, 2017)”.

The word euthanasia itself means ‘good death’. For those with chronic, debilitating illness who are burdened with immense pain every minute of the day, euthanasia gives a way out. Patients should be given the right to die, and to die with dignity. On that same note, euthanasia provides an open door for encouraging organ transplantation and giving another the right to life (Dowbiggin, 2003).

Patients in the United States are literally traveling abroad to places where physician-assisted death is legal so that their family members do not face legal repercussions of their choice. As if the burden on their shoulders isn’t heavy enough, the law has made this decision even more difficult for patients and their family members.

It is so important to keep in mind that living is not simply existing. The process of dying is a part of life and is perhaps one of the most important events in human life. Having the ability to die comfortably surrounded by people you love is invaluable. It would be inappropriate to legally punish someone that is so distressed that they feel their only option is to take their own life. Instead of shaming these people and legally enforcing a law that prolongs their suffering, we should support, encourage, and give them the right to choose for themselves.

References:

Dowbiggin I. A merciful end: The euthanasia movement in modern America. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc; 2003.

Sulmasy, Lois Snyder, and Paul S. Mueller. “Ethics and the Legalization of Physician-Assisted Suicide: An American College of Physicians Position Paper.” Annals of Internal Medicine, vol. 167, no. 8, 2017, p. 576., doi:10.7326/m17-0938.

Lesly Padilla Response: Bottom of Form

How much autonomy do people have over their own bodies? This is a question that seems deceptively simple. There are many actions that are outlawed in the United States, a particularly polarizing one is the practice of euthanasia and assisted suicide. While they are very similar it is important that the two are not seen as synonyms. Euthanasia can be described as the practice of a physician taking direct action in the death of a terminally ill patient (Goh, 2020). Physician-Assisted Suicide is the process by which a patient is given medication by a physician and takes action by their own hand (Goh, 2020). In both cases, a patient is given the means to end their own life but the doctor’s involvement differs and can be a cause for debate in its self. Opponents of such actions may site the hypocritic oath and the potential for abuse of the practice by ill intending parties. Proponents for euthanasia argue that it is more humane and gives the power of autonomy to the chronically and terminally ill. My stance on the issue, as an informed health care professional, is in favor of the right to death. As we learned in this class there are particular rights which a patient has, and it is the responsibility of the health staff to see that patients’ rights are respected. Entities who deny a patient their right to die are keeping them prisoners in their lives of pain.

While I stand with the rights of the patient, in favor of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide, I do recognize the validity of the arguments made by opponents. They argue that it goes against medical morals to kill or murder a patient. Many of the voices against euthanasia and assisted suicide cite the Hippocratic oath as it has been translated a variety of way. One classic translation of the oath states “I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody who asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect. Similarly I will not give to a woman an abortive remedy. In purity and holiness I will guard my life and my art.”(Sheil, 2018). In this classic interpretation of the oath it states quite plainly that a doctor shall not act in a way that would end a patient’s life. It must be remembered that it is not the place of a physician to decide what the patient can and can not do to her/himself as long as that patient is considered of sound mind. Opponents also argue that this could lead to a slippery slope where the decision to facilitate death is not made by the patient but by external nefarious influence such as insurance companies, angry family, or bais prospectives on whose life matters and whose does not. This concept is expressed in a paper written by Vinod Srivastava, MA, M.Phil., MSW, LCSW who states “ How it can be ensured that the decision made by the family members and/or professionals were impartial and not encouraged by any ulterior motives.”(Srivastava, 2014).

Firstly and most importantly a patient should have the right to assisted suicide or euthanasia as given to them by the rights of autonomy, freedom, and fidelity as they should be in control of their own care (Westrick, S. J., 2014). In order to mitigate the slippy slope argument “The decision for euthanasia has to be a collaborative effort of patients, their relatives, physicians, nurses, psychologists, and social workers. All stakeholders will have to decide collectively if the life has reached to an end from where all paths have an end at some distance” (Srivastava, 2014). It is through order, process, and regulation that we get the most ethical methods of facilitating euthanasia. I see how the classic interpretation of the Hippocratic oath can be used to nullify the practice of euthanasia an updated modern version has wording that is more in line with patients’ rights “Most especially must I tread with care in matters of life and death. If it is given me to save a life, all thanks. But it may also be within my power to take a life; this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness” (Sheil, 2018). With this modern interpretation, it is acknowledged that a physician’s responsibility may include inducing the death of a patient. Our society sees death in a negative light all too often and while it is sad and scary we must not forget that it is also a release of all earthly struggles and can be beautiful and dignified. We as health care providers should not be obsessed with saving lives but rather with maintaining human dignity, health, and respect.

References

Goh, S., Dr. (2020, May 30). Assisted Dying or Euthanasia; not necessarily the same thing and not always running in parallel. Retrieved May 31, 2020, from https://www.bmj.com/content/358/bmj.j3566/rr-4

Shiel, W. C., Jr. (2018, March 06). Medical Definition of Hippocratic Oath. Retrieved May 31, 2020, from https://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?ar…

Srivastava, V. (2014, July). Euthanasia: A regional perspective. Retrieved May 31, 2020, from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC41587…

NSG/426: Integrity In Practice: Ethic And Legal Considerations

NSG/426 – Integrity in Practice: Ethic and Legal Considerations

Need help with my Nursing question – I’m studying for my class.

Review “An Integrated Ethical-Decision-Making Model for Nurses” from this week’s University Library Readings.

Save your time - order a paper!

Get your paper written from scratch within the tight deadline. Our service is a reliable solution to all your troubles. Place an order on any task and we will take care of it. You won’t have to worry about the quality and deadlines

Order Paper Now

https://search.proquest.com/docview/919532335/fulltextPDF/1397E8419523405DPQ/1?accountid=35812

Apply the ethical decision-making model in the article to access to care or an ethical issue of your choice.

Note: If you have questions about your chosen topic, contact your faculty member to ensure it is appropriate.

Follow the steps provided in the model, including the following. Label each of these six steps:

1. State the ethical issue (using two conflicting ethical principles) and its relevance for nursing practice.

2. Collect and analyze additional information:

What populations does this serve?

Who are the key stakeholders?

What information is needed to overcome the problem?

After looking at additional information, decide whether the initial problem was correctly stated.

3. Develop alternatives and compare them:

What alternative programs address the issues?

4. Justify the decision:

Explain why this is important, needed, or beneficial for vulnerable populations.

5. Find strategies to implement the plan:

What ethical arguments could you use to dissuade someone who disagrees with the program?

6. Evaluate

Format your assignment as one of the following:

15- to 20-slide presentation with slide titles for key points (preferred for this assignment)

Cite at least 3 evidence-based, peer-reviewed sources published within the last 5 years to support your position(s).

Include an APA-formatted reference list.

Instructor Tips:

Week 3 Clarification For Assignment

Hello everyone!

Here’s another assignment for which I may have some good tips for you — to make it easier for you to get it written. BE SURE TO LOOK at the Grading Rubric before you start.

The topic for this week’s assignment is “Applying an Ethical Decision-Making Model.”

· If you want to do this for access to care, choose a vulnerable population (such as the elderly, diabetics, uninsured, rural health, etc) and draft an ethical statement about that population’s access to care. Use something like, “There needs to be a better way to access care for _____ (…because they don’t have the same access as others).” Remember that an ethical dilemma needs to include at least two ethical principles in conflict, for example, there may be a conflict between justice vs beneficence, or non-maleficence vs autonomy. Then label and apply each step of the model in the Park’s article to your vulnerable population.

· If you want to do this for another ethical issue of your choice, be sure you think about how to state the ethical dilemma with at least two conflicting ethical principles. That’s what makes it a “dilemma.”

There is an example at the end of the Park article that might be helpful for you to see how to go through each of the 6 steps. Be sure that you label and cover at least the first 5 steps in Park’s decision-making model. Step 6 is to Evaluate the outcomes, and this may or may not be applicable to your ethical dilemma, so it is optional. These can be short statements for each step.

Please label each of your six steps in the Park decision-making model so I can see that you’ve covered all of them. Also, be sure you cover each of the four bullet points for “Analyzes additional information” on the Grading Guidelines.

I hope this is helpful!