Posted: Feb 3, 2008, 11:18 AM CST
girlnextdormouse wrote:At this point in my life, this topic hits too close to home for me to give any opinion whatsoever, but I did want to say this:
Ray,
If you are writing a paper, the first thing you may want to consider, is coming up with a clear and precise definition that you are using for euthanasia.
Is it only physician assisted death?
Does it include “allowing nature to take it’s course” by simply choosing not to have clinical and physician intervention at all?
You can’t touch on euthanasia without bringing up the topic of hospice either. Most hospice entails dying in one’s home due to giving up life sustaining treatments. Hospice workers are often social workers, so do they qualify in your definition of physician intervention?
When you speak of assisted suicide or euthanasia, would this include family members who are willing to stand by and let a disease take it’s course on a person without medical treatment?
If so, then you are also getting into legal issues of neglect if the dying person happens to be a legal dependant. For instance, someone's 6 year old child dying of cancer.
Does it include family/friends who progressively increase pain medication at a faster rate than tolerance is built, over a period of time administered to a dying family member? In the end, if the cause of death ended up being an overdose instead of the terminal illness, is this euthanasia?
Would it include family members who are bystanders and hold the hand of a family member while they take their own life via an overdose? Would that qualify as assisted suicide?
These are important questions to ask when defining not only what euthanasia is, but also the legality of it. Hospice in America is perfectly legal, but the same actions taken in a hospital by doctors could very well have them imprisoned.
As a reader of your words, I'm still unclear on your distinction between terms.
Semantics can be a pain, but they are precisely what law is written upon. The very elements of a crime are the semantics in which the law is written.
The most important part of writing academia (as I’m sure you know) is having a clear and concise point. You can’t do that until you have clear and concise definitions for the words that make your point.
Good luck on your mission.
(And grow back that nice looking facial hair.)
I understand the terminology, and the semantics are the 'moral dilemmas' to which I have alluded but not gone into.
Passive euthanasia, non-aggressive euthanasia, aggressive euthanasia etc:
Physician assisted = euthanasia (meaning assisted by a qualified professional)
The withdrawal of medication/treatment is known as passive-euthanasia
The over-dosing (say with morphine) non-aggressive [double effect priciple].
The administration of lethal substances = aggressive euthanasia.
I know the terminology (and far more than the above), but using it will be lost on the many without a big tiresome explanation.
Thanks for your advice (clever lady)
On Euthanasia: click here to read the entire thread »