Euthanasia Ethics: A Better way to die
Ibrahim Ahmed Professor Michael Guth HCA 311-Health Economics Euthanasia Ethics: A Better way to die There are numerous controversial issues that currently affect the evolving field of psychology. Unsolved issues on human experimentation, abortion, genetic testing, and animal rights are a few examples of themes that arouse conflict and contention. Euthanasia and Physician-Assisted suicide is yet another controversial issue that has particular relevance to the field of psychology because of the apparent moral and ethical dilemmas involved. The American Heritage Dictionary defines euthanasia as "the act of killing an individual for reasons considered being merciful". Killing in this case is a physical action where one individual actively kills another. The word "euthanasia" comes from the Greek EU; "good" and THANATOS; "death" or "good death". Doctor assisted-suicide can be considered auto-Euthanasia. The Doctor provides the means for a patient to take their own life painlessly but does not actively or physically help that person die. Euthanasia, by definition a happy death, implies an easy or painless death. On one side of the argument, Euthanasia would appear to be contradicting the Hippocratic Oath, which forbids inducing death, even if it is requested by the patient. On the contrary, medicine could be referred to as the practice that not only prevents death, but
Consent to medical treatment
MEDICAL LAW To what extent have the English courts been prepared to uphold an adult patient's right to refuse medical treatment in life and death situations? What factors have been taken into account by the courts in reaching their decisions? Word Count (Including Footnotes): 2,137. PART 1. Introduction The English courts' decision whether or not to uphold an adult patient's right to refuse medical treatment ultimately hinges upon whether the adult has the capacity (competence) to refuse treatment. 'Capacity to consent to treatment is the ability or skill which a person must have to ensure the primacy of respect for a person's autonomy'.1 Where the courts find that the adult patient possesses the capacity to refuse medical treatment, they are less reluctant to withhold the patient's right to make an autonomous choice to refuse medical treatment. For example, the court would uphold a competent adult patient's choice to refuse a blood transfusion due to religious beliefs (Jehovah's Witness)2. Therefore, such a patient's right is respected. However, the willingness of English courts to uphold the rights of a competent adult patient is not identical to its willingness to uphold the rights of an incompetent patient who lacks capacity. Therefore, I will attempt to show that the English courts are only willing to uphold an adult patient's right to refuse treatment to the extent
The UK should completely deregulate embryo research and place no restrictions at all upon what scientists can do to early human embryos. Discuss.
'The UK should completely deregulate embryo research and place no restrictions at all upon what scientists can do to early human embryos.' Discuss. Whilst there are strong arguments to completely deregulate embryo research and place no restrictions at all upon what scientists can do to early human embryos, as seen through the need to promote scientific advancement and the argument that embryos accord no special status, governmental regulation of embryos is ultimately desirable. Instead, one should opt for a 'compromise' position in recognizing that embryos possess an intermediate moral status and therefore should be accorded with a degree of 'respect' to thus warrant a need for regulation upon its usage. In light of a number of scientific advances since the 1990 act such as the possibility of cell nuclear replacement and stem cell research, the amendments to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act which received assent in 2008 should be welcomed in encapsulating this 'compromise' position. This act arguably allows for scientific progression through permitting the usage of early human embryos, yet protects the status of embryos through setting important obstacles prior to gaining access to their usage. Nonetheless, regulating a fast-moving and dynamic area of science will inevitably be a challenging task and one should continuously question the necessities and prevalence
!["Discuss the different interpretations of 'the Bolam test' (see Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 2 All ER 118). Critically evaluate the impact of the Bolam test in relation to key cases, particularly with reference to the Bolitho case.](https://mbt-essays-prod-public.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/88961/listing/88961_1.jpg)
"Discuss the different interpretations of 'the Bolam test' (see Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 2 All ER 118). Critically evaluate the impact of the Bolam test in relation to key cases, particularly with reference to the Bolitho case.
Staffordshire University HEALTHCARE, LAW AND ETHICS Subject: "Discuss the different interpretations of 'the Bolam test' (see Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 2 All ER 118). Critically evaluate the impact of the Bolam test in relation to key cases, particularly with reference to the Bolitho case (see Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1997] 4 All ER 771; or [1998] AC 232). Word count: XXXX. Assignment 2001-2002 LLB 30 Credit Module Throughout human history the amount of situations arising out of peoples careless or negligent acts is parallel and inevitably adjoined with man's development and evolution. This tragicomical realisation is addressed via the common law of negligence, the principles of which date back at an almost ancient time. The law of negligence is a well-established course of action and enjoys a dominant role in English litigation. As stated by Dillion L.J. "It is now elementary that the law of negligence involves three factors; the duty of care, breach of that duty and consequent damage"1. In the medical field, due to the absence of a contractual relationship between doctors and patients, a duty of care is implied between a healthcare professional and his patient, except where private treatment is sought. The difficulty in this area arises in respect of the standard of care required from a practitioner towards his NHS
A doctor is on trial for murder, having ceased to treat a patient who has been in a persistent vegetative state for three years. Discuss the legal issues that would face the court. (2000-2500 words)
A doctor is on trial for murder, having ceased to treat a patient who has been in a persistent vegetative state for three years. Discuss the legal issues that would face the court. (2000-2500 words) The fundamental case concerning this scenario is the House of Lords case of Airedale National Health Service Trust v Bland (1993) 1 All ER 821. The judgement in this case as mentioned by Lord Scarman, in relation to decisions concerning ending a life could lead to rigidity in the law. Following through with the facts provided in the scenario and the facts of the case, in this essay I will be going through the legal and moral issues the judges took in account when coming to their decision to cease medical treatment and whether the doctor will be held liable for causing the patient’s death. I will be looking at the principles of sanctity of life and self-determination, medical treatment and duty of care. I will begin by setting out the crucial facts of the case. The seventeen and a half year old, Anthony Bland, a football fanatic and Liverpool F.C supporter was hospitalised for 3 years after severe injuries at Hillsborough football ground on 15th April 1989. During the match fans went out of control; the police tried their best to create peace but failed. As a result, 93 people died. Anthony suffered from crushed ribs and punctured lungs, which slowed down the supply of oxygen
Litigation and resource Allocation of Healthcare in the NHS.
Litigation has provided patients with access to healthcare that was initially denied to them. Judicial review of decisions made within the National Health Service (NHS) has provided those in extreme circumstances with the ability to scrutinize the viability of decisions not to provide them with treatment. Syrett outlines that judicial review allows patients to, 'redress the imbalance of power inherent in the physician-patient relationship...'1 Syrett adds that this action, 'connects the legal framework to those ethical principles'2 and necessarily, 'underpin[s] the practice of medicine.'3 Judicial review ensures that Primary Care Trusts (PCT) and Health authorities are answerable for their decisions as illustrated by Dyson J who stated 'but if they decided to depart from it, they had to give clear reasons for doing so and those reasons would have been susceptible to a Wednesbury challenge.'4 There are a number of cases in which litigation has proved a better alternative for patients who have been denied medical assistance due to resource allocation decisions; in R v North and East Devon Health authority, ex parte Coughlan [1999] Miss Coughlan a tetraplegic was told by her health authority that the home which had been provided to her and others for life, would be shut down. She applied for judicial review of the decision as it violated the promise which had been made. Upon
Medical Law: Capacity and Consent
Medical Law Coursework Common law has protected the personal and bodily interests of the individual through the law of trespass. When a patient undergoes treatment, it is the provision of consent that prevents the doctor from being held liable for a battery or for negligence. The essential elements to a valid consent can be summed up as follows: a) the patient must have sufficient understanding, otherwise known as the mental capacity to make the decision, b) the patient must consent (or refuse) the treatment of his own free will, with no duress or undue influence, and c) the patient must have been given sufficient information about the proposed treatment.1 patient is capable of making such decisions, his consent or refusal will be valid. The case of Re C held that capacity was the comprehending and retaining of treatment information, believing this information and weighing the information in the balance and arriving at a choice. The MCA now provides a fourth requirement that the patient must communicate his thoughts. Adults are presumed to have capacity to consent to treatment from the age of 18. For competent adults, the power to consent to treatment includes the right to refuse treatment. This right is premised on the right of each individual to autonomy and personal integrity. In the words of Justice Cardozo: "Every human being of adult years and sound mind has a right
The doctrine of Informed consent
Informed Consent The doctrine of Informed consent It is important to distinguish between informed consent as a doctrine and informed consent as a term used imprecisely to mean a valid consent, one where the "broad nature" (Chatterton v. Gerson [1981]) of the treatment proposed has been explained to the patient. In the context of this essay, informed consent refers to the doctrine which underlines the amount of information that a patient should be given in relation to the risks of treatment over and above those encapsulated with the "broad nature" requirement of the inevitable and inherent risks posed by the proposed treatment. Ethically, the issue under consideration is the right to self-determination and the mantra from all proponents of informed consent, as described in Largey v. Rotham, is that a patient cannot validly consent to the risks associated with treatment unless he has been told of them in advance. This posses a real problem for the medical staff. Whilst two patients will require a doctor to perform an operation to the same high standard, these two patients may require different information and different amounts of information relating to the risk involved, in order to enable them to decide whether to undergo the operation in the first place. As emphasised by Lord Templeman in Sideway v. Board of Governors, whilst one patient will need all the information
"In establishing the standard of professional conduct that ought be reasonably adopted by doctors, common law does little more than articulate standards adopted by doctors themselves, it does not impose those of its own" Discuss
Samantha Freeman BA (Hons) Legal Studies Year2 Medical Law "In establishing the standard of professional conduct that ought be reasonably adopted by doctors, common law does little more than articulate standards adopted by doctors themselves, it does not impose those of its own" Discuss the accuracy of this statement. Introduction This statement is concerned with the discussion of standard of care. An important point to note when discussing standard of care is that, the standard to which a doctor will be judged is not going to be the same as that of the ordinary reasonable man, who has no expertise in medicine. A doctor is under a duty to conform to the ordinary standards of the profession. Legally this has been defined in Bolam v Fiern Hospital Management [1957] WLR 582. In this case Lord Justice McNair stated that "The test is the standard of the ordinary skilled man exercising and professing to have that special skill, a man need not posses the highest expert skill" (Davies P195). Although on ethical point of view "judges are not qualified to make professional judgements on the practices of other learned professions" (Braizier p87). This statement could be taken as a contradiction to what LJ McNair stated above, it could be seen that doctors are articulating their own standards, because judges do not want to get involved. Difficulties The first
EVERY WOMAN SHOULD HAVE A RIGHT TO ABORTION ON DEMAND(TM)
'EVERY WOMAN SHOULD HAVE A RIGHT TO ABORTION ON DEMAND' According to Andrew Grubb1, abortion is 'the termination of a pregnancy by surgical or medical means intended to result in the death of a foetus'. Abortion in the United Kingdom without any valid reason is a criminal offence whereas, an article in the Telegraph newspaper reveals the number of abortions in Britain around 200, 000 every year.2 Recently, there has been a much debate on the right to abortion. It has grabbed the attention of many people because it creates a conflict between two other rights namely 'right to life' of the foetus and the pregnant women's 'right to choose' whether they want to bear a child or not3. The main statutes governing this issue are the Offences against the Person Act 1861, Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929, and the Abortion Act 1967. However, this essay will focus on the arguments as to whether woman should have a right to abortion or not. The Offences against the Person Act was enacted in 1861 but still plays an important role in the regulation of abortion. The term 'miscarriage' was used instead of abortion in this legislation and under section 58 of this act, every women who is intending to procure her own miscarriage should possess any poison or other noxious thing unlawfully, or shall use any other harmful substance with the like intent unlawfully, and if convicted thereof shall