A comparison of different views on euthanasia

Check new design of our homepage! Difference Between Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide There is a very thin line that defines the difference between euthanasia and assisted suicide. Both are acts of ending life and protecting a patient from further suffering. This article will cover information that will help you understand the ongoing debate on the right to die.

A comparison of different views on euthanasia

The common key features and differences between these instruments are summarised below: Enduring powers of attorney or guardianship allow a person to appoint one or more agents to make decisions about the provision or refusal of medical treatment if and when that person has impaired decision-making capacity.

In Victoria, an agent or guardian may only refuse medical treatment on behalf of a patient if the medical treatment would cause unreasonable distress to the patient, or there are reasonable grounds for believing that the patient, if competent, and after giving serious consideration to his or her health and well-being, would consider that the medical treatment is unwarranted.

A comparison of different views on euthanasia

One year after making the directive Mr A was admitted to a hospital emergency department in a critical state with a decreased level of consciousness.

His condition deteriorated to the point that he was being kept alive by mechanical ventilation and kidney dialysis. The hospital sought a judicial declaration to determine the validity of his advance directive. McDougall J confirmed that the directive was valid and held that the hospital must respect this decision.

His Honour stated and applied the common law principle that: If an advance care directive is made by a capable adult, and it is clear and unambiguous, and extends to the situation at hand, it must be respected. It would be a battery to administer medical treatment to the person of a kind prohibited by the advance care directive.

Mr Rossiter was not terminally ill, dying or in a vegetative state and had full mental capacity. Martin CJ considered the position at common law and concluded: Further research is needed to confirm the current common law position in relation to passive voluntary euthanasia practices.

Generally, however, the Australian context reflects trends in comparable international jurisdictions, as shown by the following overview of comparative regulation and jurisprudence.

These instruments allow competent adults to state, in advance, that they do not wish to be kept alive by medical treatment in the latter stages of terminal illness.

British Colombia, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Nova Scotia [53] have enacted legislation that permits people to make advance directives variously termed. While the regulatory approach varies between Australian states and territories, all states and territories permit people, in one form or another, to formally communicate their wishes in end of life situations, an approach reflected by international practice.

A comparison of different views on euthanasia

Passive voluntary euthanasia thus appears to be largely accepted within current medical practice and, in most jurisdictions, generally recognised and permitted by lawdespite the refusal of medical practitioners and policy makers to describe these activities in such terms. Thus, unlike passive euthanasia, in which the cause of death is the underlying disease or condition, with active voluntary euthanasia the death results from the action of a medical professional or other party.

As will be explored in section 4. When the medical profession becomes involved in killing, the delicate trust relationship between a patient and doctor is undermined. People trust their lives to doctors and health care workers in the knowledge that they are dedicated to the preservation of life, to healing, to caring.

This after all is the basis of the Hippocratic tradition. The Hippocratic Oath includes the commitment not to kill a patient, even if the patient requests such a course.

A number of people submitted to the Senate Inquiry that the introduction of voluntary euthanasia would undermine investment in, as well as the role and value placed on, palliative care.

Rather, it is providing care and support, letting the natural processes take their course and choosing to withdraw therapies that are not reasonable or not helpful. Specifically, the concern is that the legalisation of voluntary euthanasia in terminal cases would then lead to the practice of other forms of euthanasia such as involuntary euthanasia or voluntary euthanasia in non-terminal cases.

That is not voluntary euthanasia. For example, Professor Margaret Otlowski argued that: This is, however, a completely unsubstantiated argument.

From my understanding, in Oregon they have had this legislation for 17 years and they have done studies which have shown that this slippery slope you are referring to does not exist.

It is a scaremongering tool used by those who are ideologically opposed to the proposed legislation and who will do anything they can to stop the law. We in Christians Supporting Choice side with loving compassion and mercy and not with religious dogmatic adherence to a particular point of view There is no slippery slope.

Mr Peter Short, a man with terminal cancer who appeared before the Committee, argued: Is it rational to take a position of denying the terminally ill and suffering the choice at the end of their life, because we are concerned we cannot put effective rules around a dying process?This issues paper explores voluntary euthanasia.

It is not intended to be exhaustive, however it aims to add to considerations of this very complex and sensitive topic through analysis of the domestic regulatory environment relating to both passive and active forms of voluntary euthanasia, and of relevant international laws by way of comparison with domestic regulation.

The Impact of Christianity What if Jesus Had Never Been Born? In this article, we offer an historical look at the importance of the Christianity—putting aside matters of theology or faith.. Impact on the Value of Human Life; Compassion and Mercy.

Published: Mon, 5 Dec When it comes to religious point of views on issues, euthanasia is one of the most controversial moral topics of all time.

Home | Creation Science Association of British Columbia

Euthanasia comes from the Greek word εὠθανασία meaning ‘good death. Iago Vs. Moriarty: an Argumentative Comparison - In William Shakespeare’s Othello, the antagonist Iago shows evil motivations towards the protagonist Othello that could be considered obsessive.

Mercy Killing (& Involuntary Euthanasia) by Ron Panzer, January Some families sometimes wonder if their loved one died because of the terminal illness or if the cause of death was related to the use of medications given during hospice care.

Pet insurance is a safety net to help protect you against unexpected costs related to your pet. The most obvious reason to have insurance on your cat or dog is to cover veterinary bills.

Footnotes & Sources - Animal Testing - initiativeblog.com