WWLS

The previous two topics we're dealing with a contradictive issues. The latter is about ending a life with purpose...with good purpose. It is a decision where the patient, family members and attending doctors agree for the benefits of everyone. The former is killing one self purposely also but in a more negative side. Here no one agrees oly the person involved.

In contrast, it is not a matter of living and death. It is a matter of natural survival. The life of the patient is dependent upon the God's will but the doctor must informed the patient as well as his family. Because the Doctor's duties and responsibilities is to take good care of the patient as long as possible. So they must hav a clear conversion with the patient and family members before they proceed.

The goal of withdrawing life support when death is expected is to remove treatments that are no longer desired or indicated and that do not provide comfort to the patient. Any treatment may be withheld or withdrawn, and most ethicists concur that there is no difference between withholding or withdrawing life supportive treatments.

The withdrawal of life sustaining treatments is a clinical procedure and therefore deserves the same preparation and expectation of quality as other procedures. Informed consent should be obtained and should include honest, caring, and culturally sensitive communication with family members, explanations of how interventions will be withdrawn, strategies for assessing and ensuring comfort, information about the patient's expected length of survival, and solicitation of feedback and strong preferences about end of life care. Time should be spent discussing, understanding, and accommodating cultural and religious perspectives. An explicit plan for withdrawing care and handling complications should be formulated: the patient should be in the appropriate setting with irrelevant monitoring removed; the process should be carefully documented, including the reasons for increasing sedation; and outcomes should be evaluated to improve the quality of care.

There is no hope???

su�i�cide �� (s-sd) �NOUN:

1. The act or an instance of intentionally killing oneself.
2. The destruction or ruin of one's own interests: It is professional suicide to involve oneself in illegal practices.

Being in a state of choices are part of us being a human. Choose to breath, to live are life to the fullest, to enjoy every moment in the days of our lives.

It is so hard to think that there are people who wants to end up their own life. It felt so wrong for me to judge them. I'm not in the position at all. Having a decision to end up your life has many reasons why...a lot of reasons why. The roots are in the minds and hearts of individuals. if you strike so hard...BOOM! You'll never know what will happen.

I've heard a lot of cases of suicide: hung their selves, shut a gun in their head, drunk a poisonous chemical, drown their selves, jumped from a high-storey building and a lot more ways to end their lives.

In every cases there are also lots of reasons behind: Most especially family, broke up with a long-term relationship, belongingness to a group, and some are having an emotionally stress situation.

I, myself also a victim of suicide. In my poverty days, I'm having a condition of loneliness, sensitiveness, uneasiness, uncomfortable with the things I'm doing. So one night, I said to myself I'm so tired!!! I'm fed up with these kind of life! I wanna die! I looked around the house to see how will I end this life.

I get tired from crying and sooner and later...I've fallen to sleep.

In the next morning, I had a chance to talk to my mom. Talk about life. I adore her so much that despite of difficulties in life, she always see a light through it. She always had a resolution. She has a strong power of FAITH.

From then on, I've realized how beautiful life is. I've realized that if I end up my life...My family and friends will cry, will miss me, will never gonna see my smile again. I'm so selfish...And it hurts me too. So instead of ending my life, I seek for help to cope all my problems and my burdens.

***Suicide is not always killing your self...But I think it’s suicide not to live our life to the fullest of our abilities and potential — with love, passion, and vitality.
If you aren’t loving the life you live, you’re already dead.***

Dealing with 'Good Death'

Miracle Recoveries. They happen and I am pleased that they do. I advocate that those who are capable of making their rational decisions regarding their own end of life experience be allowed to do so.

Euthanasia. A good death according to the Greek words "Eu", good and "Thanatos", death. A choice for those who are able to make that choices.

Euthanasia is a peaceful and painless death. It is an easy death according to some dictionary. It is commonly called mercy killing.

On the other hand, it is quite possible without external intervention. The patient who wish to end up his/her life needs somone to do it for him/her. That's why the meaning has been changed to "assisted death"...so the argues now if whether the physician should be involved in the process or not.

It is first in foremost, against the doctors duty and responsibility : to do whatever it takes to takes care of anyone. secondly, the debaters ofetn factors in moral and religious beliefs.

In the United States, for better or for worse, something like concensus-medical, ethical and legal has come to inform the handling of patients to diagnosed as being PVS cases in which no more clear direction, that keeping the patient alive is pointless.

The families and attending physicians of such patients have a panel of meeting to determine whether those patients should continue to receive treatment and sustenance. if the patients wish to stop the treatment, the decision i much easier to make.

Other ethical thinkers, including many philosopher, religious leaders andtheologians say that the fissures run far deeper because they result not just from the peculiarities of a difficult case but from questionable assumptions about the status and case of PVS patients in general. At its crux, they say the question is whwther to removed the machine that keeps them alive or whether it is withholdong basic care in a way that causes death.

As I understand, "You are not supposed to do anything to hasten death, but on the other hand, there is no need to anything to artificially prolong life."

Every living thing is sentence to death. Yes, there are many ways to keep as alive but will you let your loved one still in pain for a long period of time in which he/she chooses to die?

Do what you can to make the lives of those around you better. That is enough. The rest will follow. Otherwise, you just continue to support those who are antithetical to all that you know to be right. There is a right and then there is everything else. You have the privilege to choose. You are not eclusively subject to the distates of others. Choose the right thing every time.

Conscience

On my part, I believe conscience to be the sense of right and wrong within each person. Basically, if there weren't any, nothing would be morally right or wrong, anyone would just do whatever they wanted. Shooting a person point-blank or mugging a bystander would be regular everyday occurrences in the world. Consciences are what keep wholesome people from doing these acts.

So seeing as it has been established throughout the course of time that the conscience DOES in fact exist (if it didn't the world would probably be in World War [insert random number higher than 2 here], if not already destroyed and wiped clean of existence), it begs the question as to why people still have the nerve to lie, cheat, and steal their way through life. Now, that would either tell us that consciences differ between people (meaning some people get strong ones while others get not-so-strong ones) OR that those people are strong enough to defy their consciences, fueled by whatever force that drives them (e.g. poverty, depravement, etc).

The latter is really not very likely because there are still occurrences of people who are able to hold on to their resolve and strengthen it during times of great trouble. So that leaves us with the first one, that consciences differ among different people. I suppose that there is no such thing as a conscience that views right as wrong and wrong as right, although it would still technically fill the requirements of being a conscience, which is to distinguish between right and wrong (but come on, seriously, is anyone THAT messed up?). So, that leaves us with two potential kinds of conscience. One of them is obviously the good one, the kind that knows what is actually right and definitely wrong, and another that doesn't give a damn about what's right and not.

On a topic such as conscience, it can't be avoided to run into margins of confusion. Simply put, its about morality. Some people would say that lying is an absolute error, or sin if you will, while on the other hand, the other batch of people would actually say that as long as its for a good purpose or if its a tiny little fib, the world won't get launched into oblivion. I mean even if everyone actually follows their conscience, the fact that they aren't uniform means that they are, to an extent, subjective... And would that actually fit as moral?

what do you think about ethics and bioethics?

What do I think about ethics and bioethics? That is an interesting question. "Man is gifted with the power of reason and freedom of ac tion. This is what seperates us from the other species in the animal kingdom". Let me answer this question by defining or rather differentiating them inclined with the thought above. Ethics is a branch of philosophy, encircling right conduct and good life. It’s radically broader than the common conception of the analysis of right and wrong. A central aspect of ethics is what is perceived by man to be the good life, it is the life worth living or life that is simply not satisfying, which is held by many philosophers to be more important than moral decisions.

On the other hand, bioethics is the philosophical study of the ethical controversies brought about by advances in biology and medicine. The issues tackled are concerned with the ethical questions that arise in the relationships among life sciences, biotechnology, medicine, politics, law, philosophy and theology.

The issues raised by bioethics as a distinct area of academic inquiry are largely answered by the needs of institutions examples are abortion, animal rughts, circumcision, infertility, placebo. Bioethicists today are not hired or engaged in conversation because of their opinions or because they have special skills of reasoning. but because they know and can put to work the enormous body of research and history of discussions about bioethics in a fair, honest and intelligent way, using tools from the different disciplines that improives the field.

As an effect, bioethics has been peculiarly created, by society, specifically the multi-million dollar commitment of major and minor medical centers to the study of medical ethics as part of the development of curriculum and research efforts. Going back to the thought raised earlier, Bioethics and ethics were made as a borderline or measuring stick used for the different controversial issues in our society. It is for us to use the power of reason and choice hand-in- hand with morals, God and values.