Euthanasia: The Right To Choose On Our Death

Euthanasia: The right to choose on our death

Introduction:

A topic discussed in society, since ancient times and that will continue to be discussed in the future, is the practice of euthanasia. It is treated from several points of view as the philosophical, religious, political, medical, social and ethical. As already known, death is inevitable, every human being is deadly, so every individual knows about this reality, although some prefer to ignore it. There are many factors that lead to death, such as accidents, but there are also degenerative diseases that give rise to momentary death, in turn they can leave a person with evil but with signs of life.

Few debates currently cause as much controversy as euthanasia does, the fact of causing death without pain to a patient with terminal disease, has defenders and detractors, the different sectors will be taken into account, since many of these try to impose onsociety a certain idea of progress, associated with the increase in comfort.

This work will analyze the case of Tony Nicklinson, a British who suffered from cloaking syndrome, it is characterized by a paralysis of the lower cranial nerves that leads to disability to adopt a facial expression, move, speak or communicate except throughCoded eye movements. This syndrome was the product of a stroke, which led him to fight so that his yearning to die. In addition, the following work will include the bioethical principles that are affected.

Euthanasia notion:

The term euthanasia refers to the act of ending the life of a sick person, at his or a third party, in order to minimize the suffering of the same.

The notion of euthanasia highlights two important features of their actions. First, which means that a person is deliberately end. The term derives from the Greek words "eu" whose meaning is good, and "thanatos" that means death, so etymologically, euthanasia means "good death" or "appropriate death", a liberating death of suffering, not just physicalbut also psychological.

Euthanasia case:

The next case is that of Tony Nicklinson, he was a 58 -year -old English and activist in favor of euthanasia. On August 22, 2012, the news about his death was viralized, 10 days after the judgment of the Superior Court of London, which rejected his request rejected. Although in England euthanasia is penalized by law, Nicklinson wanted to fight for his case to be an exception and that the person in charge does not correspond to criminal consequences.

Tony suffered for 7 years from a stroke, hilling syndrome, which prevented all voluntary movements by being paralyzed, with the exception of the ocular, head and eyelid movement. To communicate, he had to formulate words through highly specialized equipment. All this led to the patient, to qualify his life as a constant nightmare, so he went to justice to recognize the right to decent death.

In 2010, Tony presented his case to Justice, two years after his struggle, he dies of "natural causes", after seven days rejecting any type of food. He made that decision after hearing the High Court judgment (high court) in which Judges evaluated that they do not correspond to them to modify the legislation according to which "voluntary euthanasia equals a murder".

In the case of Tony Nicklinson it is necessary.

The disease that Tony suffered, leads him to be prostrated in a bed for 7 years, experiencing a lot of pain and suffering, more psychological than ontological, so he decided to ask his country to approve his decent death.

Dying with dignity is a human act that is assumed according to the religious or metaphysical vision of each individual. Death itself has a different meaning in each person, depending on its religious, cultural or traditional point of view. What can be said is that death is an inevitable situation that each person will face. Dignity is the intrinsic value that each person possesses, dignity as a fundamental value that each person has is a more extensive concept that cannot be caused because it is something that exists.

Kant distinguished between ontological dignity and moral dignity. The first defines it as the unconditional value that does not vary over time and does not depend on external circumstances. On the other hand, moral dignity defines it as that which man has to a greater or lesser extent according to the actions he performs, whether or not they are consistent or not to the ontological dignity of the human being. (Mendoza, and. (2017). Bioethics of euthanasia. Chachapoyas, Peru

Tony was in a state with signs of life, and causing his death either voluntarily or involuntary, including an action that aims to kill the person, which is immoral because he is contrary to the elements of ethics.

Principles involved:

The decision made by Tony Nicklinson about asking justice to death, and also that of not continuing to suffer, was an autonomous decision, since the patient described his life as a constant nightmare, which showed a state of despair and anguishto the state in which he lived.

One of the most affected bioethical principles in this case is the principle of autonomy, which establishes that every human being has the freedom to decide on himself, so this is presented as a problem. Because having the right not. For this reason, one of the elements to consider in this case, which surpasses autonomy, is the suicidal intention, which is never approved, although it is not punished for the order.

Another of the principles that is analyzed in the case of Tony, is the principle of charity and not bad efficiency, because according to the data obtained, the patient asked for his right to die, but would not incriminate the doctor or other healthcare professional. Medical ethics aims and principles, saving the patient’s life and favoring their biopsychosocial well -being, so it cannot simply cause the death of a person as a way to avoid their physical and psychological suffering because it would be faced with a serious problem,since the end of the doctor is not to cause the death of the patient, but quite the opposite.

Euthanasia from a medical view:

For some defenders euthanasia affects the world of medicine, since the proposals of their sponsors always intervene the doctor or health personnel.

Euthanasia is not a form of medicine, but a form of homicide;And if a doctor is practiced, this will be denying medicine. Medicine is the healing of the patient and helps to cope with the supreme trance of death when healing is not possible. While euthanasia, which consists of the deliberate decision to practice the opposite of medicine, since it is to kill another.

In the previously mentioned case, the medical team sought the physical, biological, emotional and psychological well -being of Tony, getting a lot involved with the patient so that his last moments were comfortable. To do this, it is worth mentioning that the work was multidisciplinary where doctors, nurses, social assistants, occupational therapists, psychologists, lawyers, ethical experts and spiritual advisors committed themselves to their work.

These professionals, in turn, were limited to the practice of it, since in England, where this very media case occurred, euthanasia is penalized by justice with a minimum penalty, since these must preserve the patient’s lifeand humanitarian ethical principles.

Likewise, this practice generates an impact on society manifesting terrible consequences, for example distrust of relatives towards the medical team.

Euthanasia from my point of view:

In my opinion, euthanasia is an act that should be carried out legally, in other words, laws should change for this to happen, since medical personnel must safeguard biopsychosocial well -being thus respecting their dignity to prevent it from suffering.

Conclusion:

Euthanasia is an act carried out by medical personnel that causes the death of a human being in order to avoid sufferings or the artificial and inhuman prolongation of his life.

In conclusion the concept of euthanasia or commonly called assisted death seems a bit contradictory, since from a moral perspective all people deserve to have a decent life and death. However, euthanasia is an act that ends a human life, so for many people it can be considered suicide or homicide.

Regarding the case of Tony Nicklinson, despite the fact that justice did not accept its request, which was to die, however medical professionals understood their desire to die and respected their decision, without contradicting it.

The limitation that Tony and the health team had, was justice, since his desire implied a qualified crime that would cause a rebellion in his country at the legislative and parliamentary level to approve euthanasia, for that reason, the ethical principles of the teamdoctor were also a limitation for the patient.