Issues of Life and Death

. . Decisions that subordinate the clemente end of a terminally ill man or woman to the technological imperative, or personal or institutional egotisminterestlegal, financial, professionalare not consistent with Christian values and traditions (Tong 27).

The purpose of medical checkup science is to alleviate human suffering, not to prolong it, and the rule against get alongive euthanasia contributes to the subsequence of suffering in many cases. Tong induces that the idea of active euthanasia, eon distasteful to many and while world something most Americans domain they would not choose, is also something most Americans today feel should be a matter of personal quality and should be judged on an individual basis:

The fact that so many quite a little are interested in euthanasia is not ineluctably a sign that this is a deathdriven culture. On the contrary, we are a culture very much bewitch with career and almost obsessive about our physical and mental wellbeing. Few of us like discommode and suffering, and single those of us who are profoundly religious can find meaning in them (Tong 33).

It is this attitude that comes under the heading of what the pontiff calls a "culture of death," though he is placing a sealed value judgment on the matter by his choice of terms. Supporters of euthanasia under trusted circumstances see their impersonate as a "culture of life," as a loyalty to

antibiotics. But what of the feeding tubes that keep up Nancy Cruzan? Of the 39 American states that have "living will" laws, intimately half specifically exclude artificial feeding from the treatments that may be refused. To remove feeding tubes seems, to many, a deliberate act of killing, bringing with it a

=================================================================

treatment either directly or indirectly. Although such a right almost certainly belongs to incompetent as well as competent individuals, there is a problem.

With the ejection of those incompetent adults who executed advance care directives while they restrained were competent, incompetent individuals are unable to express their opposition to medical treatment. As a result, surrogate decision makersusually family members or

lifesaving blood transfusions for their childrenwhen the public may agree with that.

Physicians prevail to assume that what patients and families want is resuscitation--life at all costs, but it seems that this is not true as surveys show that public opinion is on the side of withdrawing all "invasive" and "extraordinary" treatment in such cases ("Euthanasia; what is the 'good death'?" 21). In many cases, the patient who is being kept alive is also suffering great pain and indignity, and this cannot necessarily be measured objectively to an observer such as a physician. The approach suggested by Pope john Paul II is not unreasonable, but it is not capable from what he says how different his view is from that of physicians who also use painkillers which may shorten life or who world power withdraw certain procedures believing them to be extraordinary and intrusive. While physicians and the pope might be closer together than they think, what is needed is a clearer get along of guidelines showing when procedures can be withdrawn and when they cannot.

Order your essay at Orderessay and get a 100% original and high-quality custom paper within the required time frame.