Presentation on theme: "Nunu Poe PHIL 1722 Section- 60 Diana Pretty From England Not allow assisted suicide in England Have family Was rejected from both England and European."— Presentation transcript:
Diana Pretty From England Not allow assisted suicide in England Have family Was rejected from both England and European Human Right
Motor Neuron Disease MND ( Information ) Progressive Disease Over 40 yrs old, between 50-70 Men & Women 1:2 1 or 2 per 100,000 diagnosed each year in U.K Symptoms Muscle weakness Later, difficulty with mouth, throat, neck Treatment Cannot prevent from developing
Continue….. Up to 5,000 people in Britain have MND It stops the brain sending messages to muscles, which waste More people die of MND than Aids Most sufferers stay mentally alert It's not contagious
What she was willing… Diagnosed in 1999 (43 yrs old) In 2000, wrote to Tony Blair to change law In 2001, Ask public prosecution for husband can help her October, 2001, England high court reject, November, confirm by law lord Bingham March, 2002, European court; 12 hrs with ambulance April, 2002, European human right court rejected Died in 2002 at hospice
European human right court also rejected her appeal
Main Parties Dianna Pretty Brian Pretty( husband) Tony Blair ( Prime Minister) David Calvert Smith ( Public prosecution, England) Lord justice Tuckey ( High court, England) Lord Bingham (Law Lord, England) European Human Right Court
Ethical Issue Terminal illness Patient agreed voluntarily Her husband wanted to help Why could not justice let her die? Who needed to agree for that? Does someone have a right to help dying? Should Mercy killing or Assisted suicide be allowed?
Health Care Principles that are violated Autonomy Justice
Autonomy: Self-determination; right of patient to participate in ….. Patient felt lose her right Even it was voluntary, lost decision
Justice: Deals with fairness, deserts, and distribution of good and services ….. Diane Pretty speaks through her husband Brian: "I feel I have no rights“ Diane Pretty speaks through her husband Brian: "I feel I have no rights“ Justice is not for individual emotion, but it can be distributed. Netherland, Belgium, Switzerland
Utilitarian: Consequence based ethicist believe Good reside in the promotion of happiness or the greatest net increase of pleasure over pain Could not win to die so that she could not die with dignity Utilitarian ethic did not apply in this case If physicians or laws helped her that would have been an utilitarian solution.
Kantian: Duty based ethical believe It would be wrong or right because it does not depend on situation or consequences England high court and European human right decide as a duty-oriented 76 native British go to Switzerland for assisted suicide with non-physician although England practice Kantian ethic
Analysis of Assisted Suicide Proponent Need to change law Both in political and health care Terminal ill people will satisfy Can spend money for others area( research, organ transplant) Opponent Does not need to change law Conservative people will be happy Need more hospice care and palliative care Keep society maintain stable
Continue….. I would choose an utilitarian theory Good for patient and family not only financial but also benefit to others proponents’ claims Some terminal ill patients will be happy to claim to die with dignity Autonomy and human rights will be validated
Continue… Cannot harm to physician role, just allowed to family members can involve in assisted suicide Everyone should have a right to assistance for dying, if patient will not recover Should allow assisted suicide: not mercy killing!! No one should not have a benefit with her death!!!
References Edge, R S, & Groves, J R. (2006). Ethic of health care. NY: Delmar. Print. Humphrys, John. "End-of-Life Decisions Are Personal and Should Be Respected." The Right to Die. Ed. John Woodward. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2010. At Issue. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 15 Apr. 2011. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/beds/bucks/herts/66474 19.stm "Supporter of Death with Dignity." Gale Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Detroit: Gale, 2010. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 15 Apr. 2011.