Palliative Sedation Essay Example

The obligation to relieve not only pain but also suffering is fundamental to a physician's significance as a healer as well as is considered a duty medical practitioners must possess to their patients. With that said, it is noteworthy that palliative care is a method that is accepted globally as an essential strategy to get rid of as well as prevent suffering not forgetting the pain of patients with life-restricting diseases. Therefore, different scholars argue that at this point palliative sedation is a vital approach to combat extreme distress. Nevertheless, some individuals argue over the utilization of palliative sedation to unconsciousness due to its possibility to be misapprehended as substantial euthanasia. Although the process is done as required, it still provokes moral objection because of the mistaken view of a danger of hastening death.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

It is important to comprehend that an ethical perception of palliative sedation is vital in the modern world. In most cases, various authors offer different opinions concerning the utilization of palliative to unconsciousness as an intervention of the only option for a terminally sick individual to mitigate refractory, suffering, or even other prevailing bad clinical signs that have not been prevented by aggressive sign-particular palliation. In fact, many scholars maintain that palliative care plays a critical role in the treatment regimen of terminally sick people. Research indicates that about 35 percent of individuals achieving palliative care scheme in hospice schemes suffering as well as other intractable signs in the last times of their life (Levine 97). In simple terms, the current paper addresses the issue of palliative sedation and links the concept with various precepts regarding the importance of life and the way physicians should treat patients during the time of unconsciousness.

Some scholars offer many clinical issues on palliative sedation. First, some of them argue that palliative sedation to unconsciousness is effective for terminally sick individuals and is utilized as an intervention of the only option to mitigate refractory, suffering, or even other prevalent disturbing clinical signs that are not prevented by aggressive symptom-specific palliation. Some of the clinical signs mentioned above consist of agitated delirium, dyspnea, breath shortness, pain, and vomiting, to mention a few. On the same note, some scholars suggest palliative sedation for patients with urinary retention because of clot formation, myoclonus, uncontrolled bleeding, as well as gastrointestinal pain (Levine 104). In fact, a number of investigators assert that the suffering mentioned above should be observed as a useful indicator for palliative sedation to unconsciousness; however, this is controversial.

On the other hand, it is crucial to comprehend that there exist other vital medical interventions to reduce pain and suffering. Some scholars argue that palliative sedation is not the only appropriate method to deal with suffering experienced because of social isolation as well as loneliness. Instead, the preceding suffering should be handled by offering the victim with the required social support. On the same note, for people who experience existential suffering, it is vital to indicate compassion as well as enlist the support of a victim's broader social not forgetting spiritual network to address challenges that are beyond the scope of clinical care.

Pertaining to ethical considerations, it is important to take a broad array of actions to relieve different types of suffering terminally sick individuals might experience at the end of life. It is noteworthy that even if the usual medical intervention armamentarium has been exhausted, there exist many choices that range from letting the terminal sickness take its course without advanced intervention to unacceptable choices including euthanasia. It is prudent to note that actions that are meant to hasten the death of an individual are both medically as well as ethically wrong and unacceptable. Conversely, the idea of withdrawing or withholding of life-sustaining treatment as well as enabling the natural course of disorder to occur is medically and ethically effective. However, some investigators argue that even if sedative and opiate utilization in the palliative care does not hasten people's death, proportionality, as well as intention ethical issues is of concern.

With that said, individuals need to comprehend that palliative sedation to unconsciousness should be considered from the view of non-maleficence, beneficence, as well as autonomy. On the same note, it is vital to understand that the same ethical argument made for withdrawing or even withholding life-sustaining medical cure where the precept of individual autonomy requires that medical practitioners respect the decision of a victim who has decision-making capacity to forgo life-sustaining cure (Levine 106). In this case, autonomous decision-making dedicates that an informed victim should be in a position to select palliative sedation for a sick individual who lacks decision-making capacity as well as meets the required measures for receiving sedation at the end of life. It is noteworthy that requests for palliative sedation to unconsciousness that are not fit as per the acceptable clinical parameters determined by the definition of palliative sedation is not effective. In this case, the precepts of beneficence dedicate taking necessary steps to relieve pain as well as suffering.

Following utilitarianism, it is clear that when physicians think of palliative sedation, they must understand the possible consequences of their actions. In this case, it is critical that action molarity relies on the results of the perceived action. What is more, it is evident that the consequences of an action are vital only insofar as they engage both greater as well as the lesser happiness of different people. In addition, utilitarianism principle demonstrates that the evaluation of results needs every person's happiness to get similar consideration. Therefore, this implies that equal quantity of happiness counts the same. In this case, physicians should comprehend that someone's status should not determine the kind of decision to be made because each individual counts the same. In simple terms, the principle at hand indicates that any action is correct in case it generates the overall balance of happiness.

With that said, it is important to comprehend that before medical practitioners decide to apply palliative sedation, they must think of the consequences of their action to the patients. Notably, if the application of palliative sedation leads to good results, then the physicians should go for it. On the other hand, in case the consequences are perceived to be bad such as causing death, then the utilization of palliative sedation should be stopped. The life of patients should be put first and the rest follow. What is more, medical practitioners should comprehend that palliative sedation is meant to reduce pain and suffering of an individual. Therefore, in case the physician thinks that the application contributes to death, then the process should be stopped immediately. In simple terms, medical practitioners should consider the possible consequences of palliative sedation process before applying it.

In addition, virtue ethics, as well as the right action ethics, are important when handling the idea of palliative sedation. In this case, physicians should understand that the good results about the process. In particular, an event of the soul in conformity with virtue. At this point, medical practitioners should have important virtues such as truthfulness, generosity, courage, as well as self-control. Specifically, the aforementioned virtues are of great importance when it comes to palliative sedation. On the same note, physicians understand that people should not face a predictable and difficult death during his or her last times. In this case, many patients opt for an early death instead of suffering and pain for a long time. At this point, it is well understood that terminal sedation is regarded as the best option. Nevertheless, other investigators maintain that there exists many alternatives and pain and suffering should not be a reason to encourage a bad death.

Additionally, virtue ethics and the right action ethics indicate the sanctity of life. In particular, medical practitioners should comprehend the prevailing dispute that is experienced over the precept of the wrongness of killing. In this scenario, physicians are advised to look at the sanctity of life and then concentrate on ending an individual's life before time as a bad act. Notably, the process of palliative sedation engages two critical elements including withholding the utilization of nutrition and fluids as well as inducing sedation. At this point, medical practitioners should adhere to various theories such as ethical egoism, utilitarianism, Kant's theory, as well as the social contract theory. The principles mentioned above play a critical role in ensuring that palliative sedation is utilized for the good and interest of the patient.

Kant provides some important ideas pertaining to respect for individuals. In this case, the scholar at hand argues that human beings are better as compared to animals. Therefore, the life of a human being should be respected at all costs. With that said, physicians should consider Kant's theory whenever they think of applying palliative sedation to a patient. It is important to comprehend that one's life is precious and irreplaceable. Therefore, in case the palliative sedation process is meant to end a person's life, the process should be stopped immediately. However, mitigating pain and suffering are critical when it comes to an individual's life. On the same note, in case a patient requests palliative sedation to end his or her life, physicians should consider the consequences of the process before applying it.

Conclusion

Overall, virtue ethics, as well as the right action ethics, are important when handling the idea of palliative sedation. In this case, physicians should understand that the good results about the process. In particular, an event of the soul in conformity with virtue. What is more, medical practitioners should comprehend the prevailing dispute that is experienced over the precept of the wrongness of killing. Simply put, medical practitioners are advised to observe the theories mentioned above before opting for palliative sedation. Additionally, they should understand that many alternatives to reduce pain and suffering exist. Among the numerous options, they should choose the best to ensure that the life of a patient is secured fully.

Work Cited

Levine, Carol. Clashing Views on Controversial Bioethical Issues. Taking Sides. Dushkin Publishing Group, Sluice Dock, Guilford, CT 06437, 1989.