Ethics in Euthanasia: Prohibiting Physicians from Conducting the Practice

This is cold in Amsterdam and the fog in the mist of December. The birds were crying, the dog was crying, and the alarm sounded like to awaken the sleeping city. "The time of death?" The doctor asked. "6:24 in the morning," the nurse answered while watching the wrist watch. For nurses, this is a part of daily life. The patient was a woman who was in the hospital for about a week when he was in his 50's. She was stroked and sent from my family to the hospital. This woman is very lively and cheerful.

The question of euthanasia's debate is not that we are dead - we are all dead. The problem is how we die and that some kind of death such as euthanasia and doctor's suicide should be legally forbidden. In order to maintain what they should do we can show that we are currently accepting, such as rejecting treatment rather than euthanasia, respecting patients to help suicide is needed.

From a medical point of view, traditional medical ethics prohibits euthanasia, but if it is in a terminal disease with intolerable pain, the doctor will likely accelerate death from accident (unresolved and unbearable It is considered pain.) Pain, pain or other means of practice to make the patient discover a serious and unacceptable condition. In some circumstances, it is not only considered an acceptable medical practice, it is true euthanasia even when combined with palliative care. Establishment of a centralized management system has been suggested to eliminate the direct involvement of physicians in euthanasia or to support suicide. Prokopetz and Lehmann "establish the central state or federal mechanism for confirming the authenticity and eligibility of patient requests, distributing medications, monitoring needs, and using them.