An utilitarian viewpoint on non voluntary euthanasia for dementia patients

I will use this abbreviation for the sake of spending less time typing. What is so great about a natural death anyway? There are some valid reasons why it must be carefully controlled if it is legalised, because there are many ways that it could be abused.

Where are we to draw the line of competency? At least in some cases, such a license would allow caregivers to put a patient out of their misery. There obviously is not a plethora of choices.

Dutch doctor gave dementia patient euthanasia injection

Not every action committed will produce a good consequence or outcome. But of course, there are people suffering from dementia who seem to be happy, or at least do not seem to suffer.

Moral dimensions

It is for them alone to point out what we ought to do, as well as to determine what we shall do. The highest principle we should adhere to when examining voluntary euthanasia is the Greatness Happiness Principle. What are the strengths of utilitarianism? The tragedy of the disease is its destructive nature.

My father had been following the Terri Schiavo case for weeks, and though I knew the lawyer in him was enmeshed in the case, the father in him had stayed quiet. Additionally in government and in good behavior we want to multiple happiness.

There is also no doubt to our minds that it can be morally acceptable for those who do not want to continue their life with dementia to choose to die. They believe that since euthanasia will decrease misery and pain then it is morally right.

That money could be redirected towards infrastructure or research for a cure. Since natural resources arefinite, we should save them for times when we need to use them, andseek other options when we have them.

We hold that societies should provide good care facilities for patients with dementia. But there has to be a written request for euthanasia, that the patient drew up earlier.

On the part of these affections, a deficiency in point of strength is never to be apprehended: Despite my strong views on this matter I will try my best to write this in an unbiased manner. Given the complications of advance directives and the understandable hesitations of doctors, deciding now implies the view that the future decline is the basis of unbearable suffering.

How do we ensure that our aging population, particularly its most vulnerable members, are afforded both protection and autonomy? As human beings, so much of who and what we are is tied to our minds. Specifically, proponents of the practice refer to it as Active Voluntary Euthanasiawhich is legal in Belgium, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands.

If mercy killing of those in pain were to be allowed, some say that the next step might be mercy killing of individuals not needed by society, such as those who are severly disabled. The guide includes a manual for drafting a euthanasia declaration.

What are the views on voluntary euthanasia? True, many say at the end of the difficult road that it was an honor to care for their incapacitated loved ones. The driving element behind VSED is that forcing people to ingest food is as objectionable an intrusion on bodily integrity, privacy, and liberty as imposing unwanted medical treatment.

How do we define and truly live our humanity? Directly translated, euthanasia would mean a "good death". Those opposed to the act from the outset would definitely be displeased. If not, because there is no real continuity between the two persons as some argue, then person x at the time of diagnosis should not decide for person z later [ 6 ].

The reasons being that on the one hand, an advance directive presupposes a very careful and detailed statement on the wishes, whereas most advance directives are very general, but also that doctors find it impossible and unacceptable to perform euthanasia on a person who cannot at that moment express his or her will, nor understand what the physician is about to do, but who is present nonetheless.

One of the most controversial examples of utilitarianism was the dropping of the atomic bomb on Japan during WWII. Some, however, find the prospect of having to starve yourself quite horrible, and not everybody has medication to do it oneself.Sep 29,  · The medically vulnerable have rarely been in greater jeopardy.

Alzheimer’s disease patients are at particular risk. In a recent poll from Quebec—where lethal-injection euthanasia is legal—a chilling 72 percent of caregivers favor permitting Alzheimer’s patients to be euthanized, even if the Author: Wesley J.

Smith. Rethinking the Morality of Voluntary Euthanasia By Frank Collins [email protected] support equipment for terminally ill patients, it does not allow a doctor to take action to Non-voluntary euthanasia is when the person involved does not choose to die because they are not able to understand the choice or.

Dementia and assisted suicide and euthanasia Abstract The number of dementia patients requesting euthanasia in the Netherlands has increased over the past five years.

The issue is highly controversial. In this con-tribution we discuss some of the main arguments: the when he was afflicted with dementia.

More famous and non-famous. Euthanasia is viewed by many who support the right to die as a necessary companion to physician-assisted suicide because it would allow patients diagnosed with diseases such as Alzheimer’s to end their lives before their conditions progressed to a.

A utilitarian argument against euthanasia; Education And Debate Taking the final step: changing the law on euthanasia and physician assisted suicide Moral dimensions unlikely to measure up favourably to the utilitarian standard of right and wrong as understood by Bentham.

Euthanasia would not have featured as part.

The Netherlands approves euthanasia for severe dementia

The guide was updated to take away the uncertainty about the possibilities for euthanasia in dementia patients. According to the guide, doctors have given euthanasia to .

An utilitarian viewpoint on non voluntary euthanasia for dementia patients
Rated 0/5 based on 45 review