As a doctor, are you harming a suffering patient in the act of Euthenasia?

Question

what is harm?

duuude i'm not a doctor, i'm saying if you were in the position of a doctor what would the act of Euthenasia on a pathient be considered to be..... god.

Answer 1

Nope, not in my opinion. People kill other people all of the time in the name of some principle. Soldiers kill soldiers, and it usually accetpable b/c it is in the name of national defense, or democracy, or whatever. I don't think most people see soldiers as playing God, and yet they are taking lives, too.

It seems to me that a doctor who is helping a patient resolve an illness the way she chooses is doing what a good doctor should-coming up with an acceptable medical treatment for a condition. If it is acceptable to the suffering person and the doctor, I don't think it is anyone else's business.

Answer 2

The phrase of this question and the additional comment "being god" shows your bias. I will try to explain this and I hope you will be open minded to consider my answer. I don't expect you to agree.

Lots of people in critical care in hospitals (or battlefields for that matter) have injuries that have severe restrictions on a good quality of life. These patients can have significant deficits to the brain and/or bodily functions. This provides a huge burden on the families, as well as the individuals suffering through these injuries. Sometimes death is actually better than living through some things. I don't expect you to understand this but if you spend some time in a critical care unit or a ICU unit you might see what I am saying.

For the record, a physician does not make the decision to euthanize (and they usually don't actually "euthanize", they pull life support or breathing tubes so the person technically dies on their own)... they always consult the family. The decision is not made lightly. Also, you need to ask yourself is it is really trying to "be God" if the body dies off on its own... maybe keeping someone on artificial life support is actually playing God too... the argumanet can be made on both sides of the coin.

Just re-read your comments: I see now that you are not saying doctors are playing God,,, sorry for the misunderstanding.

And no... You don't harm the patient when turning off life support. Most of these patients are in a comatose state or sedated heavily from their injuries and/or don't have teh brain capacity to register pain anymore.

Answer 3

Euthenasia is not in and of itself wrong, but there are no mulligans, and I've never in about thirty years of medical practice been close to a position where I felt justified, though it's routine to limit treatment to comfort measures in terminal patients. Moreover, I don't like standing so close to the edge of that slippery slope. I have no theoretical objections to knowledgeable but non-medical people helping family members with euthenasia, but even there it's a difficult position. One must consider ulterior motives of even the most loving family members, be completely sure that maximum palliative care is rendered, and ensure that the person's desire for death is not because of a treatable mood disorder (depression). The theoretical argument for euthenasia is easy. The real-life assurances are almost impossible.

Answer 4

A doctor takes an Oath of Hypocrisy when he begins his job. This states that he promises he will do his best to help every patient. This oath, and the law, do not consider 'euthanasia' doing one's best. There's such a thin line there, morally. And everyone has very strong opinions on the subject.

Answer 5

Welll I can only hope that some of the moral minded busybodies who worry about stuff like this end up dying in some really painful, debilitating, dehumanizng way so they can be an example to the rest of us, in this area.

They shouldn't be given morphine either. I mean, when youve got some bible thumper in end stage gut cancer, with a day or two of life left in him, incapacitated by pain, puking up bloody chunks of his own intestines about every fifteen minutes, the last thing youd want to do is corrupt his moral fiber by getting him addicted to a narcotic.

Answer 6

Of course not! You took that person out of being in pain, and those who disagree, well would you rather have a person live in terrible pain for the rest of their lives, wishing for an end to their suffering, or would you prefer to see them go, but go to a pain free stage, im not challenging people's religions ou there, but i belive that the person would go to a better place.

Answer 7

Trick question, any real doctor abides by the hippocratic oath. They aren't practicing medicine by killing somebody.

Answer 8

Loaded question!!! Agreed, we love our pets and put them under....problem is where do you stop, and heaven forbid the Gov't get involved...it's done , like the armed forces don't ask don't tell...
just dangerous coz of humans for what we are.. let's get uncle joe done so we get his boat for fishing...evil things lurk here...

Answer 9

HARMING!!!!!!?

You're KILLING the patient, you moron. Where did you get your medical license from, University of Kevorkian?

Answer 10

No, its in an act of compassion.