Question #1: Witholding & Withdrawing Life Sustaining Treatments (Readings: AMA, “Withholding & Withdrawing Life Sustaining Treatment”) 8.5 Points
Mr. Carter, a 37 year old man, has been hospitalized for several months receiving treatment for a case of terminal cancer. Although there is no cure for his cancer, the treatment he receives prolongs his life. During discussions with his oncologist, Dr. Smith, Mr. Carter makes it clear that his biggest concern is the well-being of his family—a wife and three young children. Recently, Mr. Carter decides that he wants to stop treatment. He states that he accepts his death, no longer desires to live in pain, and wants to spend his last days at home with his family rather than in a hospital. Dr. Smith, however, wants Mr. Carter to continue the treatment since it is his best medical option. Although Dr. Smith believes that Mr. Carter is competent, she thinks he is making the wrong choice since without the treatment he will die shortly.
According to the AMA, should Dr. Smith allow Mr. Carter to stop treatment? (Be sure to explain why the AMA would make this recommendation.)
According to the AMA, would it make a difference if instead of stopping the treatment, Mr. Carter wanted to refuse starting the treatment? (Be sure to explain why the AMA would give this answer.)
In your own opinion, do you think Mr. Carter should be allowed to stop treatment? Why or why not?
Question #2: Active & Passive Euthanasia (Readings: Rachels, Active and Passive Euthanasia) 8.5 Points
Using the same case as Question #1 answer the following questions:
According to Rachels, what is Mr. Carter actually requesting and what does the “conventional doctrine” say about such requests? (Be sure to explain what the “conventional doctirne” is according to Rachels.)
According to Rachels, if Mr. Carter asked for active euthanasia, would it be morally acceptable to accept Mr. Carter’s request? (Be sure to explain Rachels’s arguments regarding active euthanasias in your answer.)
In your own opinion, do you think it would be morally acceptable for Dr. Smith to accept Mr. Carter’s request for active euthanasia? Why or why not?
Question #3: Research on Human Subjects (Readings: The Nuremberg Code and The Declaration of Helsinki) 8 points
Dr. Smith works at a group home for children and adults with severe mental and physical disabilities. Over the past few months they have been struggling with an outbreak of COVID-19 in their adult population. Dr. Smith is not a trained researcher but starts developing a vaccine for the virus because she wants to help her patients. In order to expedite the study, she starts testing the vaccine directly on residents, both young and old, without any previous tests on animals. She also fails to discuss the study with the residents’ parents or guardians, as she does not want to slow down the process. In the end, Dr. Smith succeeds at developing a vaccine for COVID-19.
Which aspects of Dr. Smith’s vaccine experiment violate The Nuremberg Code?
Which aspects of Dr. Smith’s vaccine experiment do not violate The Nuremberg Code?
According to The Declaration of Helsinki, is testing the vaccine on this population morally acceptable? Why or why not?
In your own opinion, is Dr. Smith’s vaccine experiment morally acceptable? Why or why not?
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|