Medical Ethics Accounts of Ground-Breaking Cases
Medical Ethics: Accounts of Ground-Breaking Cases
1.) If you had only a 1% chance of coming out of a long-term coma or PVS, would you want physicians to keep treating you or would you rather they let you die? why or why not?
What burdens or benefits would continuing treatment place on your family and loved ones?
2.) If families are having difficulty coming to a consensus about the death of a relative in a coma, is it permissible for physicians to resolve the conflict by saying the person has died, and then withdraw life support without telling the family? What if the physician does this because he believes he will save the hospital money and help the family move on with their lives?
3.) What do you feel is the proper role of state and federal government in cases like Nancy Cruzan and Teri Schiavo? Should it protect vulnerable patients and assume the worst in families or should it assume the best in families and give them wide latitude to decide?
Use examples from the reading and required resources to support your answers to the above questions.
Answer Preview For Medical Ethics Accounts of Ground-Breaking Cases
Access the full answer containing 810 words by clicking the below purchase button