Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Transcript of TOK Presentation
- A family member making the decision for the mentally ill patient could be impaired by their own emotions Mr. C was a 68 year old man who was suffering from chronic paranoid schizophrenia and gangrene in his right leg. Doctors felt his chances of recovery from gangrene were around 15%, and hence recommended his leg be amputated. However, Mr. C said he would rather "die on two legs than live on one", and his solicitor asked the hospital not to amputate under any circumstances. They refused, and so he sought a court injunction to uphold his wishes. The court decided that, even though the patient was suffering from schizophrenia, he was able to understand his medical situation and that his choice could result in his death. The court upheld his decision and the case later paved the way for the acceptance of advance refusals of medical treatments. How do we know when and why it is wrong to kill another human being? Knowledge Question 1 Knowledge Question 2 To what extent should we allow the mentally ill to make decisions about their own well being? Knowledge Question 3 Are there circumstances where certain causes of death are acceptable by our society’s standards, specifically circumstances related to euthanasia? - Most people view killing as wrong in general because their emotional knowledge (WOK) tells them it is wrong.
- However the morality of murder like most everything else, is dependent on the situation, a general rule cannot be applied.
- For example, if someone is trying to do harm to you, perhaps even kill you, is it still wrong to kill them?
- In the U.S. the majority of states have upheld the death penalty, is it wrong to kill another person as punishment for things they have done? Perhaps for having killed someone themselves?
- In these examples, if you decided it was not wrong, you would be using Logical knowledge to dictate your decisions. - It is their own body, so should they be in full control of it?
- Selfish motivations:
against euthanasia: doctors want personal gain or the family can't let the patient go
for euthanasia: family member wants inheritance or they might want to save money on not having to pay for it - Doctors are very knowledgeable and experienced. We greatly value their suggestions and advice because of their education, therefore they should be trusted.
- However doctors may not be able to be fully trusted in these situations because they do not know the patient on a personal basis like the patient’s family does
- Doctors do not have to comply to your wishes if they believe your decision to be medically inappropriate, so a doctor could use this power to veto the mentally ill patient’s choice -OK to euthanize if there is no future for a person.
People are generally alright with euthanasia if the person in question requests it and if they would benefit from it. For example, if a person is in pain and the only way to relieve that person of his/her pain is to euthanize them, people would agree that, if it is his decision, he should be allowed to die.
However, as in the case of Mr. C, people would normally say that living with one leg is no reason for loss of life. Ethics - Doctors think it is wrong to let someone die if they have a reasonable chance of survival because they swore an oath to protect the lives of their patients.
- However, if doctors believe a person is living in untreatable pain, then they would euthanize this person to stop the pain. Natural sciences- Medicine Natural Sciences- Medicine People are more attached to their family than to strangers, so they think that any cause of death in a family member is unacceptable, thus making the answer subjective.
However, if a person is asked this knowledge question, but this time it is directed at a person they do not know, their answer will likely be more objective than the first answer.
Therefore, families and friends should not be allowed to make decisions concerning a patient's euthanasia because of involvement with the patient and their inability to see the situation objectively. Human sciences Ethics Euthanasia: Euthanasia is the administration of a lethal agent by another person to a patient for the purpose of relieving the patient’s intolerable and incurable suffering.
Passive Euthanasia: Euthanasia by the deliberate withholding of life-sustaining treatment.
Active Euthanasia: Euthanasia by the act of killing. Overview I. Real Life Situation, Mr. C
II. First KQ and analysis
III. Second KQ and analysis
IV. Third KQ and analysis
V. Conclusion Ethics Natural sciences- Medicine - Medically, what determines whether it is wrong to euthanize?
- In states where physician assisted suicide is legal, the person who is to be euthanized must be dying, and their expected date of death must be 6 months or earlier.
- But what about other reasons? Incurable diseases, amputations as discussed in the real life example, disabilities?
- In addition, can a doctor even euthanize somebody without breaking their pledge to do no harm? Sources "Opinion 2.21 - Euthanasia." Opinion 2.21 - Euthanasia. American Medical Association, 1994. Web. 13 Jan. 2013.
"State Laws on Physician-Assisted Suicide - Euthanasia - ProCon.org." State Laws on Physician-Assisted Suicide - Euthanasia - ProCon.org. ProCon.org, n.d. Web. 13 Jan. 2013.
http://www.euthanasia.cc/cases.html Human Sciences Human Sciences - How can a third party know whether it is wright or wrong to euthanize someone who is not capable of making the decision?