Death and Dying Reflection
Chapters 7 and 8 of Death and Dying it deals with Euthanasia as considered an ethical way of alleviating an individual from pain and suffering when other means are not possible. The study in the emphasis of the chapter that patient can be investable part of the procedure, the researchers, should be specific at the conclusive end of the research and marginal situations which its purpose would compulsory to dodge distress. However, these specifications have to be drawn from pathologic, behavioral, and physiologic evidence. In the situation when death is sure or predictable before it turns into moribund, the option is initiated before they die under excruciating conditions. In some instances, patients are deprived of happiness, and the life of the patients appears to be neutral at the same time being negative in regards to the quality of living. In other words, it is the biological entities falling short of the different psychological abilities of ordinary human beings. In such a manner, the patient or close relatives can view that the best option is to terminate life for the greater good willingly.
The details are given on the signs of pain, psychological torture, indisposition, and moribund situation should be variable in determining whether to conduct Euthanasia or otherwise. The factor that should be well thought before concluding is distinguishing between the position on the possibility of the patient recovering and hopeless situation that got low odds to reach stages of death. There should be close working relationship between stakeholders such as research directors, medical practitioners and other committee members. It should be noted that difference manifests itself between active Euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. The former implies that the health practitioner administers an individual with a lethal dosage of medication. At the same time, the latter means the patient was taking their own life but in a physician-assisted (Howarth & Margot, 381). However, based on the understanding the Jesus’ suffering, it is apparent that all life possesses dignity hence no need to conduct stuff to achieve. Also, pain is considered redeeming; hence our connection to Jesus endures suffering since God is amid our misfortunes. It might be necessary first to verify that a person needs to be alleviated from pain, followed by the informed concept. The advanced directive of medical attention emphasis the importance of a living will make that an individual makes his/her wishes known on medical treatment in case it turns critical. However, the decision should be made based on the level of illness and recovery rate.
In case there is evidence proving the need for Euthanasia then the whole process should take a professional and compassionate approach. It should be complement by applying methods that are optimal subject to the conditions of the patient. Health practitioners should make an accurate verification of the patients presented for Euthanasia to avoid mistakes that would be costly, unnecessary deaths. It is considered more humane when it is executed competently with appropriate recommended procedures. It turns to be inhuman if the people implementing it lack competency that sets the whole process irrelevant and contrary to human doctrine. The concerned institutions must equip medical personnel with the necessary skills to conduct Euthanasia inhumane way. The purpose of Euthanasia should be alleviating pain from the suffering patient instead of taking life away unnecessary.
Howarth, Glennys, and Margot Jefferys. “Euthanasia: sociological perspectives.” British medical bulletin 52.2 (1996): 376-385.