The topic of a patient choosing to take their own life in the medical field is a widely debated issue. When the topic is being addressed, the health care workers must take into consideration the law, and ethics. Law and ethics play a big role due to the life or death situation the patients face. A worker must abide by the rules and law of their field, yet they must take everything into consideration to see whether if it is ethical or not. The article “Case Twenty-three: A Fevered Hand on a Cooling Brow- The Nurses’ Role in Aid-in Dying”, by Peggy Connolly, David R. Keller, Martin Leever, and Becky Cox White, addresses the realistic situation of whether nurses should partake in aiding a patient to end their life. There is a lot in which experts
…show more content…
The authors disagreed with the first moral objection because nurses do harm patients on a regular basis. Some of the patient’s treatment may inflict physical harm to the patient. This is unavoidable because the treatment that inflicts pain may actually benefit the patients’ health and well-being. However, even if the treatment is to benefit the patients’ well-being, the patient may not want to live due to pain and suffering. Only the patient would know what they want; quality of life, or the quantity of life. Death is sometimes sought after due to the fact that some patients do not want to live with suffering and pain. In this situation, death can be seen as the least harmful of the two. To solidify the confidence of trust in nurses, the authors brought up statistics show that physicians who assist in death would still be deemed trustworthy, therefore nurses would be trusted and respected just as much as the physician. A reason may be that nurses are trusted to take care of their patients to the best of their ability and to care for them. The very last objection that the authors addressed was abuse if AID was legal. Since nurses deal with patients and their family, nurses would try to help rather than harm the patient in every way possible, which would tie into W.D Ross’ duties of beneficence and …show more content…
Unlike W.D Ross’ prima facie , Kant’s Categorical Imperative does not bend the rules or make any exception. Nurses’ hold the four moral objections as if they were laws, and yet when aiding a patient to their death contradicts the four moral objections, but mostly the principle of not harming others. According to Kant, one’s own action should be righteous to the fact that it can be held as a universal law, even if it does not seem righteous to the person in the current situation. Nurses are supposed to promote health and the well-being of their patients, not take their life. If AID cannot be held as a universal law, then it would not be moral for nurses to aid in dying according to Kant’s
The authors disagreed with the first moral objection because nurses do harm patients on a regular basis. Some of the patient’s treatment may inflict physical harm to the patient. This is unavoidable because the treatment that inflicts pain may actually benefit the patients’ health and well-being. However, even if the treatment is to benefit the patients’ well-being, the patient may not want to live due to pain and suffering. Only the patient would know what they want; quality of life, or the quantity of life. Death is sometimes sought after due to the fact that some patients do not want to live with suffering and pain. In this situation, death can be seen as the least harmful of the two. To solidify the confidence of trust in nurses, the authors brought up statistics show that physicians who assist in death would still be deemed trustworthy, therefore nurses would be trusted and respected just as much as the physician. A reason may be that nurses are trusted to take care of their patients to the best of their ability and to care for them. The very last objection that the authors addressed was abuse if AID was legal. Since nurses deal with patients and their family, nurses would try to help rather than harm the patient in every way possible, which would tie into W.D Ross’ duties of beneficence and …show more content…
Unlike W.D Ross’ prima facie , Kant’s Categorical Imperative does not bend the rules or make any exception. Nurses’ hold the four moral objections as if they were laws, and yet when aiding a patient to their death contradicts the four moral objections, but mostly the principle of not harming others. According to Kant, one’s own action should be righteous to the fact that it can be held as a universal law, even if it does not seem righteous to the person in the current situation. Nurses are supposed to promote health and the well-being of their patients, not take their life. If AID cannot be held as a universal law, then it would not be moral for nurses to aid in dying according to Kant’s