Euthanasia: Right to Life vs Right to Die

Euthanasia
Name:
Institution:

Abstract
The problem that will be addressed in this paper is the ethical dilemma that presents to the health care professionals in performing euthanasia. Euthanasia has brought about controversial debates all over the world. Euthanasia is commonly referred to as assisted death killing of a patient using lethal drug doses in the hospital performed by a certified health professional. The patient requests for the clinical process to be performed in a hospital or it can be done by passive euthanasia. It is mostly viewed as suicide by the public and considered illegal. The process may involve the introduction of lethal doses of particular drugs to cause death. This paper discusses the progress and challenges facing euthanasia acceptance in different countries and the effect on healthcare professionals in these countries. Also, the paper highlights some recommendation that may help solve the existing problems where euthanasia is illegal in order to harmonize its practice.

Euthanasia
Euthanasia is a practice done by a health professional that is considered assisted suicide where the health professionals actively or passively assist the patient to die. The passive euthanasia involves the removal or disconnection of patients from life support. The action of detachment does not help the patients recover or improve their health which implies that they would die a natural death. Active euthanasia involves the injection of lethal doses of drugs that would cause death to the patient (Gamliel, 2012).

The patient can decide to perform the cation by themselves, or it can be done with the assistance of a health professional (Healey, 2013). Euthanasia presents ethical dilemmas to the health professionals, justice departments, and law enforcement around the world. It is still a topic that is under intense debate in various countries around the world especially in countries with a strong influence of religion.
Analysis of the Issue
Healthcare professionals are bound to the Hippocratic oath that prevents them harming patients. Euthanasia is observed commonly observed as assisted suicide. Various countries have different legal policies regarding euthanasia. Several countries such as Belgium, Colombia, and Germany have allowed the practice of euthanasia and have implemented the guidelines on how it should be executed. In these countries, health professionals are permitted to undertake the clinical killing of patients with the consent of the patient and immediate relatives. It offers a significant challenge to those who would want to maintain ethical integrity in their practice. (America Nursing Association, 2013). The moral dilemma is present in all countries whether the method of assisted suicide has been legalized or not. The nations that have legalized the practice, still face various challenges including where the patient may want assisted suicide, but the family rejects approving due to internal family conflicts. Also, some of the countries would want to legalize the practice, but they may have a poor justice and law enforcement system that would compromise the intention of its legality.
The Hippocratic Oath states that that healthcare professionals should only be dedicated to assist the patients to alleviate their suffering (America Nursing Association, 2013). Even though the practice may be allowed in some countries, most of the criticism that arises from different groups is the ethical consideration of the practice. The healthcare professionals violate their Hippocratic oath by killing their patients through euthanasia (Ellis, 2014). Further, almost all countries ratified the fundamental human freedoms and rights including the right to life which was adopted by the international community through the United Nations. The countries have implemented the law in their constitution which provides the justice departments in these countries a dilemma due to lack of laws that state any exceptions. The freedoms ratified by the international community should not have limitations as the intention of the general assembly is to harmonize the regulations that improve the well-being of human beings on the planet.
Some countries have opted to define specific cases where euthanasia is allowed such as in terminally ill patients. The sensitive nature of the process has left most countries regarding it as illegal. Without strong policies on the legal definition and circumstances that allow euthanasia may expose the issue to exploitation which may be harmful to the patient and healthcare professionals. In these countries where euthanasia is legal, the is a difference in legal definition of suicide and euthanasia making it easier for health professionals to undertake the process. The exceptional circumstances where euthanasia is allowed include during irreversible comatose, a request from a terminally ill patient, and court cases where passive euthanasia has been granted. The health professionals should, however, be cautious while handling such cases. For example, the nurses should understand all the legal provisions and decide on the steps to take. The physicians should also work together with nurses in following the correct procedures.
In some countries where the practice is illegal, the patient may want the process done, but the physician is bound to the state laws which do not allow euthanasia. Even in instances where the patient’s condition has no chance of improving, the healthcare professionals are not authorized to perform euthanasia. Most countries are of the view that the practice may be exploited by any party to achieve their motives. Cases such as the cost associated with critical care may lead to consideration of euthanasia which should not occur. It has also been argued out that some people may illegally lead the patient to consider euthanasia to cause the death. Additionally, countries under dictatorship may exploit such a provision in their constitution and employ it as a method of oppression against its citizens. Such notions are the reasons why the practice remains illegal in most countries around the world.
Discussion on ethical considerations from the opposing notions
Two ethical theories can define the opposing ideas on euthanasia. One of these ethical theories is Kantians approach. Such an approach does not allow any form of murdering. The approach defines that there can be only right or wrong. The Kantians approach does not provide any room for exceptions where the wrong thing can be considered acceptable. The approach can be considered the basis of the argument that outlaws the practice in many countries around the world. The Kantians notion is not bound to any spiritual beliefs, but most of the countries with strong religious influence may agree with the approach. However, the Kantians approach approves that the punishment of killing another person for capital offenses is acceptable (Haerens, 2015).
The second ethical theory is the Utilitarian approach that forms the basis on which side a person may perceive euthanasia. The idea permits specific actions based on the assessment of the situation and results that would bring the greatest amount of contentment to the highest number of individuals involved. The approach is the basis for the acceptance of the practice where it is legalized. The Utilitarian approach would allow a person who would want the process undertaken to proceed with the approval of family members. The approach also applicable in situations where a patient may be suffering from an irreversible terminal condition and is in a vegetative state. In this specific case, the family members may view euthanasia as the best way to solve the problem. The Utilitarian approach can be considered as the basis for pulling the plug on such patients. Further, it is also the basis of the creation and implementation of laws that would be followed for euthanasia to be legalized. (Paterson, 2008)
Recommendations
It is vital for national organizations to come together and collectively help define euthanasia and discuss ways in which the practice can be harmonized. Although the legality of the issue differs in different states, the method should be well set and the ethical dilemmas addressed. There are legitimate situations where euthanasia should be allowed although strict policies need to be developed to prevent any loopholes that may compromise the process. In countries where the practice is legal, an extensive study on the effects and consequences should be noted. Other countries could adopt the best policies from such countries that may help in addressing the challenges in euthanasia.
Additionally, the ethical dilemma presented to the health professional is a matter of concern. The acceptance of euthanasia in any country should be supported but guidelines on how the practice is done (MacKinnon & Fiala, 2018). The governments can come up with alternative solutions that would remove the burden of administering euthanasia from health professionals. The most prominent challenge would be to create a department that would handle euthanasia-related cases. The unit would include individuals from the justice department, law enforcement agencies and people with the knowledge of drug administration. Further, the government while implementing such a strategy would provide the responsibilities of such a department and give them the power to handle relevant tasks. The administration would be assisted by technology where possible. The intention would be to remove the burden from health professionals to avert the occurrence of ethical dilemmas following the guidelines stated in the Hippocratic Oath.
Alternatively, the international community can meet and place euthanasia as the primary topic of discussion where countries with opposing views could discuss the merit and demerits of its legalizations. Although having such a debate at the international level presents numerous challenges, reaching an agreement is not impossible. The problems would arise in the case of active opposition from countries where their tradition, culture of religion does not permit any form of denying the right if life. In the case where the international community adopts an approach to euthanasia, the recommendations are implemented worldwide which may help address the problems (Wyatt, 2015). It would also play a role in harmonizing the practice in around the world. Aligning the practice would imply that physicians and other health professionals do not have to worry since they can practice in a similar regardless of the country that they live.
Conclusion
The practice involves the introduction of lethal doses of drugs to cause death. The legality of the practice differs in the different nations due to the occurrence of the various perceptions of the practice. Healthcare professionals are presented with an ethical dilemma owing to the instructions laid out in the Hippocratic Oath. Additionally, the justice departments where the practice is deemed illegal are also presented with challenges in situations where an individual would want euthanasia performed with the approval of family members. The notion of euthanasia sparks sharp debate in many countries around the world. Ethical theories such as Utilitarian and Kantians approach define the perceptions that describe the different perspectives. The Utilitarian approach allows an exception to the various rules as long as it brings happiness to the highest number of individuals. The Kantian approach states that there can only be good and bad without exceptions which is the basis for euthanasia’s rejection by certain people. Counties should come together and harmonize the practice to address the challenges brought about by euthanasia.

References
America Nursing Association. (2013). Position statement: Euthanasia, Assisted Suicide, and Aid in Dying. United States: Silver Springs.
Ellis, P. (2014). Understanding ethics for nursing students. Los Angeles: Learning Matters.
Gamliel E. (2012). To end life or not to prolong life: The effect of message framing on attitudes toward euthanasia. Journal of Health Psychology, 18(5), 693–703.
Haerens, M. (2015). Euthanasia. Farmington Hills: Greenhaven Press.
Healey, J. (2013). Voluntary euthanasia debate. Thirroul: The Spinney Press.
MacKinnon, B., & Fiala, A. (2018). Ethics: Theory and contemporary issues. Boston: Cengage.
Paterson, C. (2008). Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia: A Natural Law Ethics Approach. United States: Ashgate.
Wyatt, J. (2015). Right to die? Euthanasia assisted suicide and end-of-life care. Publishing Group.