Course Project Milestone – Annotated Bibliography

Maureen

2 days ago

Course Project Milestone – Annotated Bibliography

Personal Ethical Factors in the Euthanasia Debate

One of the personal ethical factors is people’s autonomy and personal choices. Proponents of euthanasia argue that everyone, especially those with unbearable suffering, terminal illness, or hopeless situations, for instance, brain-dead individuals, has a right to choose when and how they die. The argument emphasizes that the person who is suffering should be the one to determine what to do as opposed to other people deciding it for them. The second personal factor in the euthanasia debate is the quality of life. This factor emphasizes that when one’s quality of life is deteriorated by aging or illness, it is rational for a person to choose to end their life and alleviate their suffering rather than continue to live when their quality of life only gets worse. Another addition to this factor is that some people may not be able to afford the treatment needed to sustain their lives even though they are not getting better. Under such conditions, it is also reasonable to choose to end your life by euthanasia rather.

On the other hand, personal ethical factors against euthanasia include religious beliefs. Most religions regard death as a crucial factor in finding meaning in human life. In addition, religions also regard life as sacred, which implies that it is a gift that humans should treasure, and when given, only God, Buddha, Allah, or other deities in various religions can take it away. As such, any act of taking life that is not natural is seen as an unacceptable act. A second personal ethical factor against euthanasia is the psychological impact that leads one to decide to commit this act. This argument states that seeing as most people who choose euthanasia are hopelessly sick, they should not be allowed to make such a decision as their physical health could have affected their mental state, leading to conditions like depression, fear of being a burden, and hopelessness.

Communal Ethical Factors in the Euthanasia Debate

The first communal ethical factor in the euthanasia debate is based on a society’s values and norms. The collective norms and values of a society will determine its stand on euthanasia. For instance, individualistic societies are more likely to be accepting of a person’s choice of euthanasia compared to collectivistic communities, which usually emphasize communal welfare. A second communal ethical factor for euthanasia is the legal status regarding the action. Some communities, including the Netherlands, Canada, and Colombia, among others, have legalized euthanasia in their country. As such, there are no disreputable views on the matter, while other countries outlaw such actions, deeming them completely unethical and unlawful. Another community ethical factor in euthanasia concerns the medical community, whereby the proponents argue that medical practitioners and patients have autonomy to decide what they want and that the practitioners must alleviate the suffering of those in their care. Contrastingly, opponents of euthanasia argue that medical practitioners have no right to take a life and honor their oath of no harm. Lastly, some communities may oppose euthanasia because they fear that once authorized, it could lead to cases of involuntary or non-voluntary euthanasia, especially in cases of elder abuse.

Evaluation Using Kantian Ethics

Kant’s definition of the categorical imperative is that these are moral laws that everyone has to follow despite their wishes or extenuating circumstances (Rachels & Rachels, 2012). An example of the categorical imperative is the universalizability principle, which simply states that if one individual can do something, then everyone else must also be able to do it. Applying this imperative to euthanasia, if it were universally acceptable, it would indicate that taking a life to relieve suffering is an acceptable action for everyone.

Annotated Bibliography

Bellon, F., Mateos, J. T., Pastells-Peiro, R., Espigares-Tribo, G., Gea-Sanchez, M., & Rubinat-Arnaldo, E. (2022). The role of nurses in euthanasia: A scoping review. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 134, 104286.

This study “reviews” international laws and scientific literature with the aim of defining the role a “nurse” should play in “euthanasia” practice. The study involved the review of legislation and scientific papers from 1992 to 2021 on the roles of nurses in regard to euthanasia. The results showed that only a few countries had well-defined roles of nurses in the matter. As such, nurses could be taking up roles that are not theirs or not taking up roles that they should be responsible for because they do not know. “This review uncovered different euthanasia-related key roles and tasks nurses perform and demonstrated evidence that nurses are essential in euthanasia care delivery. Additionally, this review demonstrated a lack of nursing role specificity in the legislation of most countries where euthanasia has been legalised” (p. 6). I agree with the study’s recommendation that policymakers must consider the extensive roles that nurses play in euthanasia so that they can be provided with the educational and other support needs they require to effectively perform the task. This study is important as it highlights the lack of proper guidance nurses face in regard to their role in euthanasia.

Calati, R., Olié, E., Dassa, D., Gramaglia, C., Guillaume, S., Madeddu, F., & Courtet, P. (2021). Euthanasia and assisted suicide in psychiatric patients: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of psychiatric research, 135, 153-173.

This study explores the increasing number of psychiatric patients undergoing “euthanasia” and the ethical concerns behind these actions. In the study, the researchers analyzed data from different countries, including Belgium, Switzerland, and the Netherlands, among others, all of which had recorded an increase in euthanasia among psychiatric patients. Based on the arguments made, euthanasia is allowed for patients with mental illness because some studies have shown that mental pain also causes “intolerable pain,” hence meeting the requirements for euthanasia. In addition, the study points out that there are no clear criteria to determine eligibility for euthanasia among said patients, leaving much grey area. The result of the study showed that euthanasia is a loophole that psychiatric patients, for instance, those in “depression,” use to complete suicide, and based on this, I agree with the study’s argument that there must be clear guidelines in regard to euthanasia. “Among the pEAS-C reported to the FCEC in the period 2002–2013, 117 cases (88 women, 75%) were identified (Dierickx et al., 2017): 71% had only a mood disorder, 10% a mood disorder with another psychiatric disorder, and 19% had other psychiatric disorders.” (p. 166). This source is important in highlighting the murkiness on which euthanasia is performed, and that should be addressed promptly.

Cayetano-Penman, J., Malik, G., & Whittall, D. (2021). Nurses’ perceptions and attitudes about euthanasia: a scoping review. Journal of holistic nursing, 39(1), 66-84.

This is a study that explores the “attitudes” that “health professionals,” particularly “nurses,” have towards “euthanasia.” The results of the study showed that there was a divide among nurses, with some supporting it while others opposed the action. Those in support cited reasons including patient autonomy, alleviating unbearable suffering, and legality of the action. Contrastingly, those in opposition cited factors like religious reasons, ethical concerns, and poor palliative care. I believe that nurses are entitled to their own views about euthanasia, but these views should not be an obstruction to doing their duty, especially in countries where euthanasia has been legalized. “In the field of education, more discussions and information about euthanasia are needed to clarify attitudes and legalization issues. Nurses need to be informed of existing legislation and provided professional guidelines to help direct action” (p. 81). This study is significant as it shows the dilemmas or rather challenges that some medical practitioners face when a patient requests euthanasia.

Inglehart, R. C., Nash, R., Hassan, Q. N., & Schwartzbaum, J. (2021). Attitudes toward euthanasia: a longitudinal analysis of the role of economic, cultural, and health-related factors. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, 62(3), 559-569.

This article explores how different factors, including economic, religious, and health-related factors, influence “attitudes” toward “euthanasia”. The researchers analyzed euthanasia from sixty-two countries, all of which have varying economic statuses, religions, and health data factors. Accordingly, the research showed that one perspective differs significantly across countries. Secondly, data showed that these perspectives tend to change as time goes by, with high-income countries having a more positive outlook on it. However, this was not the case in less economically secure and religious countries. Further, health-related, especially countries with good healthcare systems, have a more positive outlook on euthanasia. “Euthanasia-related attitudes differ widely depending on the cultural context; changes over time varied in both directions; euthanasia-related attitudes were associated with economic, religious, and health-related factors. With globalization increasing cultural diversity, these findings can inform physicians’ communication about end-of-life decisions with patients and families from diverse backgrounds” (p. 1). This article is a good source of information that can be effective in helping one understand how different cultures and backgrounds affect one’s stand in regard to euthanasia.

Raus, K., Vanderhaegen, B., & Sterckx, S. (2021, February). Euthanasia in Belgium: shortcomings of the law and its application and of the monitoring of practice. In The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy: A Forum for Bioethics and Philosophy of Medicine (Vol. 46, No. 1, pp. 80-107). US: Oxford University Press.

This article explores the “Belgium” “laws” that regulate “euthanasia” in the country, especially how they have created a slippery slope that has led to an increase in the number of euthanasia cases, most of which are highly shown to be unethical and unlawful. This article is critical because it shows how the laws of euthanasia are ambiguous and leave a lot of room for interpretation. I agree that specificity is extremely important in a matter such as taking the life of a patient and should be extensively analyzed before the implementation of laws. Otherwise, issues such as murder by medical practitioners, elder abuse, murder by relatives in charge of patients, or suicide will be excused or go unnoticed. “There are increasing numbers of requests and granted requests in patients with diseases other than cancer, those who die after 80 years of age, and those who reside in nursing homes” ( p. 81).

References

Calati, R., Olié, E., Dassa, D., Gramaglia, C., Guillaume, S., Madeddu, F., & Courtet, P. (2021). Euthanasia and assisted suicide in psychiatric patients: a systematic review of the literature. Journal of psychiatric research, 135, 153-173.

Cayetano-Penman, J., Malik, G., & Whittall, D. (2021). Nurses’ perceptions and attitudes about euthanasia: a scoping review. Journal of holistic nursing, 39(1), 66-84.

Rachels, J., & Rachels, S. (2012). The elements of moral philosophy 7e. McGraw Hill.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

We’ll write everything from scratch

Question

Answer this question: What are the personal and/or communal ethical factors that may be involved in determining the moral position of either side in that debate?
Next, articulate and then evaluate the ethical positions using Kantian ethics (that is, the categorical imperative) relative to the long-standing debate (that is your topic chosen in the week three assignment).
Finally, create a complete annotated bibliography for 5 academic scholarly sources. You will annotate each source. The sources should be relevant to your topic chosen in the week three assignment.
Include the following:

Course Project Milestone – Annotated Bibliography

Publication details
Annotation (a detailed reading of the source)
Each annotation section should include the following:

Summarize key points and identify key terms (using quotation marks, and citing a page in parentheses).
Describe the controversies or “problems” raised by the articles.
State whether you agree or disagree and give reasons.
Locate one or two quotations to be used in the final research project.
Evaluate the ways in which this article is important and has helped you focus your understanding.
Use the following as a model:

APA Reference
Mezirow, J. (2003). Transformative learning as discourse. Journal of Transformative Education, 1(1), 58-63.

Annotation Example
In this article, Mezirow (2003) makes a distinction between “instrumental” and “communicative” learning. “Instrumental learning” refers to those processes that measure and gauge learning, such as tests, grades, comments, quizzes, attendance records, and the like. “Communicative learning,” on the other hand, refers to understanding created over time between individuals in what Mezirow calls “critical-dialectical-discourse,” (p. 59) which is a fancy way of saying, important conversation between 2 or more speakers. Another key idea Mezirow discusses is “transformative learning,” (p. 61) which changes the minds, hearts, values, and beliefs of people so that they may act better in the world. Mezirow argues that “hungry, desperate, homeless, sick, destitute, and intimidated people obviously cannot participate fully and freely in discourse” (p. 59). On the one hand, he is right: there are some people who cannot fully engage because their crisis is so long and deep, that they are prevented. But, I don’t think Mezirow should make the blanket assumption that everyone in unfortunate circumstances is incapable of entering the discourse meaningfully. One thing is certain: if we gave as much attention to the non-instrumental forms of intelligence–like goodness, compassion, forgiveness, wonder, self-motivation, creativity, humor, love, and other non-measured forms of intelligence in our school curriculums, we’d see better people, actors in the world, and interested investigators than we currently have graduated high school.