Choose 3 of these cases to examine and give your thoughts on. In the three cases you chose, is there any defense for the death of the infant (this might be incredibly difficult in a few of the cases)? Explain why or why not. If you recall, refusing medical care was also present in two of the three cases we looked at in Week 1 (Baby Theresa and the Conjoined Twins). Consider these cases you’ve l

 

 

Link to the textbook that must be used:
https://www.qcc.cuny.edu/SocialSciences/ppecorino/MEDICAL_ETHICS_TEXT/Table_of_Contents.htm

 

A content warning for Chapters 9 and 10: there is some very offensive language used with regards to mental and physical disabilities, as well as some racist language being used.

 

As always, you do not have to read any links provided by the textbook, except for the two Wikipedia links below, and the two Wikipedia links for Karen Ann Quinlan and Terri Schiavo in Chapter 10 (just a general skim of the Wikipedia links so that you can answer the prompts; you won’t be tested on dates or names from those links).

 

Prompt: Two Parts relating to Chapters 9 and 10

Part 1 (Chapter 9): In Chapter 9, section 1, there are 8 different medical cases of infants dying either due to mistreatment, removing some sort of medical care, or outright murder (infanticide).

These are the cases in section 1:

·       Baby K (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby_K)

·       Baby Owens

·       Baby Jane Doe (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby_Doe_Law)

·       Sun Hudson

·       Daniel McKay Infanticide

·       Baby Afreen Infanticide

·       Keli Lane Infanticide

·       Andrea Yates Infanticide

o   A Note: The Baby K and Baby Jane Doe cases in the textbook end mysteriously without much information on what happened, so I added in the Wikipedia pages for each so you can learn about how long each of them survived (scroll down to “Baby Jane Doe” in the second link; she is still alive).

Choose 3 of these cases to examine and give your thoughts on. In the three cases you chose, is there any defense for the death of the infant (this might be incredibly difficult in a few of the cases)? Explain why or why not. If you recall, refusing medical care was also present in two of the three cases we looked at in Week 1 (Baby Theresa and the Conjoined Twins). Consider these cases you’ve looked at, as well as the rest of Chapter 9, and consider the following questions: Is it morally acceptable for parents to refuse medical treatment for their children on the grounds of the child being physically/mentally disabled (this can mean anything from examples like deafness, blindness, Down Syndrome, Cerebral Palsy, extreme prematurity, and many other potential options)? What about if their religious beliefs reject medical treatment (like surgery or blood transfusions)? What about if the parents cannot afford to raise their child? Should physicians have a say in these situations? Explain your reasoning and use at least one moral theory/tradition from Week 3/Chapter 2 in your answer.

 

 

 

You all probably also want to discuss the decision scenarios from Section 5 of this chapter. You can mention those in your answers above if you want (especially if they relate to your answers to the questions), but I did not want to overload you all with more work since we have 2 chapters to cover. You will have a couple of short answer questions about those scenarios on the second quiz though, so you will get to do some thinking about those difficult cases.

 

In Chapter 10, section 1, there are many cases relating to Euthanasia. Euthanasia relates to a patient who is dying and either needs medical equipment to continue to survive or wishes to die on their own terms. Passive Euthanasia is when medical equipment is removed to allow a dying patient to die (sometimes this is called “pulling the plug”). Active Euthanasia is when a conscious patient who is dying wishes to die sooner, usually because they are suffering/in horrific pain (sometimes this is called “physician-assisted suicide). For quite a while, passive euthanasia was very controversial from many moral perspectives, however it has become more generally accepted over time. Currently, the still deeply controversial issue is active euthanasia, as many states and countries still have it outlawed. In section 1, read the top 3 cases listed (Karen Ann Quinlan, Terri Schiavo, Nancy Cruzan). You will have to read the Wikipedia articles for Karen and Terri. Section 2 has a little extra information on the Nancy Cruzan case. These are the 3 most popular and most important cases with regards to Passive Euthanasia.

 

One of the key moral questions relating to Medical Ethics and Euthanasia is “Are there times where death may be preferable to life?”

 

 

Part 2 (Chapter 10): What are your thoughts on one of the following passive euthanasia cases (Karen Ann Quinlan, Terri Schiavo, Nancy Cruzan)? You only need to write about one of these. Would you act differently from the family members in the case? What about the responses of the hospital, general public, or politicians/judges? (Do any of those thoughts/opinions matter in these cases?) Is there anything morally wrong with passive euthanasia? What should we do in situations where someone is in a persistent vegetative state (meaning there is no brain function and no hope of ever regaining consciousness), but has never made it clear if they want to continue to live through medical devices/assistance (breathing tube, feeding tube, or other forms of life support) or not? Should that decision go to the person’s parent, spouse/partner, their friends? Explain your reasoning. Is there anything morally wrong with active euthanasia? Is it a leap in moral logic to argue that active euthanasia is the equivalent of murder? Would it be wrong for a child suffering from a debilitating disease, like cancer (with no hope of recovery), to want to die via active euthanasia? Explain your reasoning.