{"id":437,"date":"2015-02-28T23:59:05","date_gmt":"2015-03-01T04:59:05","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/scholarblogs.emory.edu\/phil116bioethics\/?p=437"},"modified":"2015-03-02T01:55:34","modified_gmt":"2015-03-02T06:55:34","slug":"end-of-life-ethics-application-to-the-case-of-brittany-maynard","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/scholarblogs.emory.edu\/phil116bioethics\/2015\/02\/28\/end-of-life-ethics-application-to-the-case-of-brittany-maynard\/","title":{"rendered":"End of Life Ethics: Application to the Case of Brittany Maynard"},"content":{"rendered":"

This week\u2019s readings about end of life palliative care decisions and the struggle of their authors to morally define and establish ethical norms left me thinking about the recent media coverage of Britney Maynard. This past fall, it was difficult to walk into a grocery store without seeing Maynard\u2019s face splashed across a tabloid or lifestyle news magazine cover. Brittany Maynard was a 29-year-old woman diagnosed with terminal stage IV glioblastoma multiforme brain cancer in January 2014. After her initial surgical treatment proved unsuccessful and her tumor returned, Maynard decided to forgo additional treatment of chemotherapy and radiation. According to her editorial for CNN<\/b><\/a>, Maynard and her family reached the conclusion that all remaining treatments could not save her life and would destroy the months she had left to live. Maynard instead chose to establish residency in Oregon in order to gain access to a dosage of lethal barbiturates under Oregon\u2019s Death with Dignity Act, passed and put into effect in 1997.<\/p>\n

\"Image<\/a>
Image Source:<\/span>
People Magazine Cover October 27, 2014. Digital image. Daily News. New York Daily News, 15 Oct. 2014. Web. 28 Feb. 2015. <http:\/\/www.nydailynews.com\/life-style\/health\/terminally-ill-brittany-maynard-graces-people-cover-article-1.1975440>.<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

This law allows competent adults with a physician-diagnosed terminal illness the right to request lethal prescription drugs and use them to die should they voluntarily wish to do so. Individuals cannot qualify for the drugs solely based on age or disability status, nor can they receive them if they are deemed to have a psychological or psychiatric disorder, such as depression, that could infringe on their ability to make an informed decision about death (Oregon Death with Dignity Act). Once a person has received their prescription, they can choose to use or not use the medication at will. The law still forbids physicians from ending a person\u2019s life in patient assisted suicide through \u201clethal injection, mercy killing or active euthanasia\u201d and protects the patient\u2019s death (should they choose to use their prescription) from being classified as \u201csuicide, assisted suicide, mercy killing or homicide, under the law\u201d. \u00a0Brittany chose to end her life surrounded by family members on November 1st<\/sup>, 2014 by ingesting her prescription.<\/p>\n

Brittany\u2019s passing left me unsettled and I realized that Beauchamp and Childress and Thomas et al. do little to provide a moral code for judging end of life cases. Their writings detail the necessity for evaluating morality on a case-by-case basis for end of life decisions. Their frameworks for \u201ckilling\u201d versus \u201cletting die\u201d and \u201cactive\u201d versus \u201cpassive\u201d measures explain the beliefs of the medical profession, but they decline to confirm or deny that these frameworks are logical or morally right. \u00a0On the other hand, Mcintyre, in her discussion about the principle of Double Effect, makes it clear that she would support \u201cdeliberate hastening of death\u201d in circumstances where it could \u201crelieve great suffering\u201d (72).<\/p>\n

Nevertheless, a decision like the one made by Maynard makes us uncomfortable because of preexisting personal convictions and values that differ beyond the \u201ccommon morality\u201d we generally use to evaluate ethical situations. Diversity in faiths and upbringings will always create minute differences in the value and purpose of physical life. As Beauchamp and Childress say, it\u2019s not so much what causes death that results in the debate of whether a death is unjustified a \u201ckilling\u201d or justified as a \u201cletting die\u201d. They state: \u201cThe validity of the authorization\u2014not some independent assessment of causation\u2014determines the morality of the action.\u201d (Beauchamp and Childress 177). Different backgrounds mean people will place validity in the hands of different individuals.<\/p>\n

Some may place the validity of the authorization of death only with god, while others may believe it lies with the ill individual alone. In the case of Brittany Maynard, I personally believe that the acceptance or disagreement with Maynard\u2019s decision and Oregon state law comes down to the sanctity of life versus quality of life debate that Thomas et al. describe (210). Those who believe that quality of life is more important than the sanctity of life will choose to honor the principle of autonomy over the non-maleficence\/beneficence of prolonging life. And, those who choose sanctity of life as more important will see the prolonging of life as an act of beneficence that is more important than personal autonomy in Brittany\u2019s case\u2014regardless of Oregon law.<\/p>\n

Works Cited<\/p>\n

Beauchamp, Tom L., and James F. Childress. Principles of Biomedical Ethics<\/i>. 7th ed. New York: Oxford UP, 2013. Print.<\/p>\n

\u00a0“Death, Dying, and Euthanasia.” Well and Good: A Case Study Approach to Health Care Ethics<\/i>. 4th ed. Peterborough, Ontario: Broadview, 2014. 208-14. Print.<\/p>\n

Maynard, Brittany. “My Right to Death with Dignity at 29.” CNN<\/i>. Cable News Network, 02 Nov. 2014. Web. 11 Feb. 2015.<\/p>\n

Mcintyre, Allison. “The Double Life of Double Effect.” Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 25.1 (2004): 61-74. Web.<\/p>\n

United States of America. Oregon Health Authority. Public Health. The Oregon Death with Dignity Act: Oregon Revised Statutes. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Feb. 2015. <http:\/\/public.health.oregon.gov\/ProviderPartnerResources\/EvaluationResearch\/DeathwithDignityAct\/Documents\/statute.pdf>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

This week\u2019s readings about end of life palliative care decisions and the struggle of their authors to morally define and establish ethical norms left me thinking about the recent media coverage of Britney Maynard. This past fall, it was difficult to walk into a grocery store without seeing Maynard\u2019s face splashed across a tabloid or … Continue reading End of Life Ethics: Application to the Case of Brittany Maynard<\/span> →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2704,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-437","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/scholarblogs.emory.edu\/phil116bioethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/437","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/scholarblogs.emory.edu\/phil116bioethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/scholarblogs.emory.edu\/phil116bioethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/scholarblogs.emory.edu\/phil116bioethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2704"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/scholarblogs.emory.edu\/phil116bioethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=437"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/scholarblogs.emory.edu\/phil116bioethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/437\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":439,"href":"https:\/\/scholarblogs.emory.edu\/phil116bioethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/437\/revisions\/439"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/scholarblogs.emory.edu\/phil116bioethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=437"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/scholarblogs.emory.edu\/phil116bioethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=437"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/scholarblogs.emory.edu\/phil116bioethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=437"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}