Legal and Ethical Issues Surrounding Physician – Assisted Suicides

As the limits in specialized medical advancements has been made surprisingly clear, that individuals are able to live longer due to modern medical technology. Americans appear to be even more eager to talk about and address the decision that are made when it comes to physician assisted suicide. This development toward perceiving the suitability of help with dying raises lawful and moral issues for doctors and healthcare providers such as private healthcare offices, intensive care healing centers and hospitals. These issues that arises involves the impacts on the doctor and patient trust among each other, the Hippocratic Oath upheld by most doctors and how much of a value of life system that the provider possesses. On the off chance that help with suicide gains more extensive social adequacy and becomes legitimate in more states, health administrations will eventually have to address the moral and ethical issues that will be brought to the forefront .

There are many medical facilities that house terminally ill patients, patients with irreversible neurological diseases and patients who have been classified as being in an unresponsive vegetative state. The states that house these types of patients have begun to pass enactment making doctor helped suicide lawful to lessen the suffering and discomfort of individuals who have been diagnosed with terminal ailments. This type of enactment presents moral and ethical concerns for directors based on legitimateness, ethical quality and the appropriate supervising and training of facility staff. Managers will face occasions where doctors ethically do not concur with the training or practices, but doctors and or managers can potentially be replaced if they do not provide the necessary care required by the patient or the facility. Physician assisted suicide may arise religious conflicts in within an administration, where as a manager must diffuse the situation equitably.

One of the major issues that managers must deal with is the “slippery slope argument”. The slippery slope argument basically states that if individuals begin to permit position A to come to fruition then it is exceptionally likely, even certain, that, through some immediate or aberrant association, position Z will also come about. This an issue relating to physician assisted suicide because if individuals begin to allow unethical practices such as euthanasia, then society will relentlessly start allowing and accepting other morally wrong and unethical practices. A manager’s responsibility is to monitor institutional qualities and enforce facility values. This likewise implies that administrators should have individual qualities that are in accordance with that of the foundation. In this way, it is vital that managers make a valiant effort to handle the slippery slopes arguments quickly, morally, ethically and in a viable manner.

According to the legal system, doctors can be held liable if a patient dies while in their care and depending on the circumstances, can be prosecuted in a court of law. Only a hand full of states have made it legal for physicians to assist patients in suicidal related deaths and major legislative changes would have to take place before other states would legalize physical assisted suicide or euthanasia. From an economic standpoint, patient care can be very expensive, but if a patient decides that he or she want to participate in Euthanasia or PAS, then insurers, health facilities and private care providers would benefit because economic cost would be lowered as opposed to providing expensive patient care for the duration of the patient’s life. Whether morally or ethically wrong, in order for physician assisted suicide and/or euthanasia to be legalized nationwide, numerous socioeconomic adaptations and changes must be implemented. Until then, health care facilities, doctors and managers will continue to face ethical challenges in relation to physician assisted suicide and euthanasia.