Euthanasia: My Stance of opposition
Euthanasia: My stance of opposition
Introduction
This paper is a continuation of this author's previous paper of opposition "Euthanasia: An ethical dilemma", in relation to the "Groningen Protocol ? Euthanasia in severely ill newborns" (Verhagen & Sauer, 2005). The determination of said author's position on the ethical dilemma of euthanasia is reexamined using the Michael McDonald ethical decision-making model (Storch, Rodney & Starzomski, 2004). Re-evaluation using aforesaid ethical framework for decision-making yields an unchanged stance of opposition. However, previous arguments of sanctity of life, protection of the vulnerable population, and the principle of nonmaleficence were adjusted. This paper reaffirms prior standpoint against euthanasia, with emphasis on relational ethics and relevance to nursing practice in Canada, using the following ethical principles: of nonmalifecence, beneficence, and justice. In addition, ethical theories of Kantianism and Communitarianism will be discussed.
Ethical principles
Nonmaleficence
Canadian nurses are committed to the patients that they serve. This principle requires nurses to act in such a manner as to avoid causing harm to patients (Burkhardt & Nathanial, 2002). Harm or injury may refer to physical harm such as pain, disability, death; or emotional harm such as causing feelings of helplessness, and isolation (CNA, 1998). Euthanasia in this case can be said to be harmful based on the principle of nonmaleficence because it causes the negative outcome of unnatural death of patients. Nurses must be aware of not causing harm especially in end-of-life treatment issues in which a patient may request the illegal act of euthanasia. Nurses must ...