The Right and Duty to Die .


26 views
Uploaded on:
Category: Travel / Places
Description
Quinlan. How does the court legitimize the privilege of a skilled individual to reject medicinal treatment?Constitutional rightBalance right of individual to deny treatment with state\'s entitlement to protect lifeMedical ethos of giving guide to the withering.. Saikewicz- - The state\'s countervailing hobbies. Protection of lifePg. 583-589Protection of the enthusiasm of guiltless third partiesPgs. 593-595The prev
Transcripts
Slide 1

The Right and Duty to Die

Slide 2

Quinlan How does the court legitimize the privilege of a capable individual to decline medicinal treatment? Established right Balance right of individual to decline treatment with state\'s entitlement to safeguard life Medical ethos of giving guide to the withering.

Slide 3

Saikewicz- - The state\'s countervailing advantages Preservation of life Pg. 583-589 Protection of the enthusiasm of blameless outsiders Pgs. 593-595 The aversion of suicide Pg. 589-90 Maintaining the morals of the restorative calling Pgs. 590-93 Encouraging the beneficent and human care of harrowed people ( Bergstedt case, note 1, p.586) Evaluate each of these

Slide 4

Conroy How does Conroy develop the method of reasoning defending the privilege of a capable individual to forego therapeutic treatment? How does Conroy influence the proceeding with precedential impact of Quinlan?

Slide 5

Cruzan v. Executive, Missouri Department of Health How does Cruzan manage the subject of the privilege of a skillful individual to deny therapeutic treatment? Right certain in the idea of "educated assent." Inference from earlier choice that the privilege is encapsulated in 14 th revision\'s assurance of life, freedom and property." Notion of a "freedom intrigue."

Slide 6

Notes and Questions Would patients be disheartened from looking for care if life-managing consideration couldn\'t be pulled back? Is there a contrast amongst withholding and pulling back care legitimately or ethically What part does cost play in the verbal confrontation over the privilege to withhold or pull back life-managing care? What is the state\'s enthusiasm for the safeguarding of human life separated from the individual\'s enthusiasm for his/her own life? In the event that the state has an autonomous intrigue, how would we adjust it against the enthusiasm of the person?

Slide 7

Notes and Questions How to Quinlan and Conroy vary on the adjusting of state and individual interests? Consider issue of Mr. Cure on page 588 and inquiries at end of the note. What is the distinction between the withdrawal of life support and helped suicide?

Slide 8

Lane v. Candura and DHS v. Northern What are the actualities of Candura and what does the court hold? What are the realities of Northern and what does the court hold? What recognizes the cases?

Slide 9

Notes: Assessing Competence Should patients need to clarify their method of reasoning for dismissing or tolerating treatment? Is a clarification important to Assess capability What regard ought to be appeared to young people\'s choices Consider Belcher v. Charleston Area Medical Center , pg. 598 Should patients who have a tendency to waver about their restorative choices be required to submit to a holding up period before their choices are actualized?

Slide 10

In Re Conroy/In re Jobes/Cruzan How are the patients in Conroy and Jobes alike or divergent. What tenets are set up in New Jersey for a surrogate decisonmaker to withhold or pulls back life bolster? What does Cruzan add to the dialog?

Slide 11

Problems Family Decisionmaking, pg. 631 note 6 Should families choices be controlling? Difference among relatives How settled Should some relatives hold trump cards? Ought to living wills and intermediary assignments be joined? What exhortation do you give customers worried that they have heard specialists don\'t take after living wills?

Slide 12

Problems Problem, Page 640 Review the cases on page 644-45. Which ones do you concur with; which ones do you differ with?

Slide 13

Anderson v. St. Francis-St. George Hospital What are the certainties of this case? Is proceeded with life a compensable harm? No Why? Notwithstanding tolerating break of an obligation and causation, issue is harms and court finds there is not approach to put a cost on proceeded with life. Rejects thought that patient could be granted harms for agony and experiencing streaming proceeded with life. Why are courts hesitant to force harms for giving undesirable treatment?

Slide 14

Physician Assisted Suicide

Slide 16

In re Baby K What are the truths of this case? Why, given the medicinal evaluation of worthlessness, is the doctor\'s proficient judgment disregarded?

Slide 17

In re Wanglie What are the actualities of this case? Could the patient\'s guarantor decline to pay for her proceeded with restorative care in light of the fact that such care is pointless and in spite of therapeutic exhortation?

Slide 18

In re Bowman What are the actualities of this case?

Recommended
View more...