,PLS3701 Assignment 2 (COMPLETE ANSWERS)
Semester 1 2025 (872216) - DUE 29 April 2025; 100%
TRUSTED Complete, trusted solutions and
explanations.
Biomedical Ethics
Is euthanasia, in the form of physician-assisted dying, ethically distinct from withdrawing life-
sustaining treatment and allowing a patient to die? Critically engage with this question by
analysing key ethical principles, such as autonomy, beneficence, and non-maleficence. Develop
a well-reasoned argument, drawing on philosophical perspectives and relevant case studies.
Introduction
The issue of euthanasia, specifically in the form of physician-assisted
dying, and its ethical distinction from withdrawing life-sustaining
treatment is a highly complex and contentious topic in biomedical ethics.
Both practices involve end-of-life decisions that aim to respect the
autonomy of the patient and address issues of suffering. However, there
are key differences in their ethical implications, particularly with regard
to the principles of autonomy, beneficence, and non-maleficence. These
principles are foundational to medical ethics and guide the actions of
healthcare professionals when making decisions that impact patient
welfare. This essay will critically examine these two practices, analyzing
them through the lens of these ethical principles and drawing on
philosophical perspectives and real-world case studies.
1. Autonomy
Understanding Autonomy:
Autonomy refers to the capacity and right of individuals to make their
own decisions regarding their lives and bodies. It is a cornerstone
principle in medical ethics, acknowledging the importance of self-
determination.
, In healthcare, respecting autonomy means honoring a patient's right to
make informed choices, even if those choices are difficult or
controversial.
Autonomy and Physician-Assisted Dying (PAD):
Physician-assisted dying involves a physician providing a terminally ill
patient with the means (usually medication) to end their own life, at their
request. Proponents argue that PAD respects the autonomy of the patient
because it allows individuals to make the decision to end their suffering.
For patients who are facing terminal conditions and unbearable pain,
PAD offers the ultimate control over their own death, respecting their
personal values and wishes.
Autonomy and Withdrawing Life-Sustaining Treatment:
Similarly, withdrawing life-sustaining treatment also respects autonomy,
as it allows patients to choose to refuse treatments that prolong life but
do not contribute to recovery or improvement in quality of life. Patients
may make advance directives or communicate their wishes to refuse
such treatments if they deem them unnecessary or undignified. However,
unlike PAD, withdrawing treatment is seen as letting the patient die
naturally, rather than actively bringing about death.
Ethical Distinction:
The ethical distinction here lies in the intention and action involved.
PAD is an active intervention to end a patient’s life, whereas
withdrawing life-sustaining treatment may be seen as allowing death to
occur naturally, without direct intervention. While both are forms of
respecting autonomy, PAD involves a more direct action to bring about
death, which can raise concerns about the role of healthcare
professionals in intentionally ending life.
Semester 1 2025 (872216) - DUE 29 April 2025; 100%
TRUSTED Complete, trusted solutions and
explanations.
Biomedical Ethics
Is euthanasia, in the form of physician-assisted dying, ethically distinct from withdrawing life-
sustaining treatment and allowing a patient to die? Critically engage with this question by
analysing key ethical principles, such as autonomy, beneficence, and non-maleficence. Develop
a well-reasoned argument, drawing on philosophical perspectives and relevant case studies.
Introduction
The issue of euthanasia, specifically in the form of physician-assisted
dying, and its ethical distinction from withdrawing life-sustaining
treatment is a highly complex and contentious topic in biomedical ethics.
Both practices involve end-of-life decisions that aim to respect the
autonomy of the patient and address issues of suffering. However, there
are key differences in their ethical implications, particularly with regard
to the principles of autonomy, beneficence, and non-maleficence. These
principles are foundational to medical ethics and guide the actions of
healthcare professionals when making decisions that impact patient
welfare. This essay will critically examine these two practices, analyzing
them through the lens of these ethical principles and drawing on
philosophical perspectives and real-world case studies.
1. Autonomy
Understanding Autonomy:
Autonomy refers to the capacity and right of individuals to make their
own decisions regarding their lives and bodies. It is a cornerstone
principle in medical ethics, acknowledging the importance of self-
determination.
, In healthcare, respecting autonomy means honoring a patient's right to
make informed choices, even if those choices are difficult or
controversial.
Autonomy and Physician-Assisted Dying (PAD):
Physician-assisted dying involves a physician providing a terminally ill
patient with the means (usually medication) to end their own life, at their
request. Proponents argue that PAD respects the autonomy of the patient
because it allows individuals to make the decision to end their suffering.
For patients who are facing terminal conditions and unbearable pain,
PAD offers the ultimate control over their own death, respecting their
personal values and wishes.
Autonomy and Withdrawing Life-Sustaining Treatment:
Similarly, withdrawing life-sustaining treatment also respects autonomy,
as it allows patients to choose to refuse treatments that prolong life but
do not contribute to recovery or improvement in quality of life. Patients
may make advance directives or communicate their wishes to refuse
such treatments if they deem them unnecessary or undignified. However,
unlike PAD, withdrawing treatment is seen as letting the patient die
naturally, rather than actively bringing about death.
Ethical Distinction:
The ethical distinction here lies in the intention and action involved.
PAD is an active intervention to end a patient’s life, whereas
withdrawing life-sustaining treatment may be seen as allowing death to
occur naturally, without direct intervention. While both are forms of
respecting autonomy, PAD involves a more direct action to bring about
death, which can raise concerns about the role of healthcare
professionals in intentionally ending life.
