Right To Die Case Study

Right to Die
Kazaray Rieckhoff
Rasmussen College

Author Note This paper is being submitted on September 18, 2014, for Ann Never’s M230/HSC2641 Section 08 Medical Law and Ethics course.

Right to Die For this week’s written assignment we are to go over the Nancy Cruzan case and to go through the seven-step decision model to determine where or not the decision made was ethical. This model is designed to look at the facts of each case and to decide if ethical decisions are being made before actually deciding upon a decision. Some decisions require little to no questions to be considered before acting upon them however, there are some decisions that do have a vast amount of questions that need to be considered before making
such a decision. While looking at step one, what we need to know about this particular case is that Nancy Cruzan was involved in an automobile accident that put her into a vegetative state. People involved in this situation are Nancy Cruzan (unable to speak for herself due to her state), Nancy’s parents, American Civil Liberties Union, the judge and the U.S. Supreme Court. This situation takes place in Missouri and occurs in 1983. Moving on to step two we need to consider if the decision made is fair, justified, moral and if it favors Nancy’s individual rights.
Two of Nancy’s co-workers had come forward to release that Nancy did in fact state that she would not like to live like Karen Quinlan if the particular situation were to arise. So in this case it is fair to Nancy that her wishes on her treatment if left in a vegetative state be sought out. It is also fair to her parents, not only being granted guardianship, but as family who also wished for her to be taken off nutrition support as they just watched their daughter lay and suffer. In perspective, I believe this case to be moral because Nancy was left lifeless. The only means of life left in her was the oxygen she was breathing and her heart beat, there was no person left in her. Nancy’s individual rights include her statement in regards to succumbing to a vegetative
state. Step three we discuss about the integrity, quality and respect for others.
With this case, the co-workers had the integrity to release the wishes of Nancy and to ensure that her quality of life be considered. Also, to respect their statement and Nancy’s parent’s wishes as well. In this case, it was not stated there would be any profitable settlements, such as any life-insurance claims. However, the decision does profit the family by a means of relief that their daughter would no longer be suffering. In step four we are to consider alternatives to the decision being made. The only means of an alternative decision would to leave Nancy in her vegetative state and keep her on her nutritional support instead of removing her feeding tube. If this were to be the decision, Nancy would be unresponsive for the rest of her life but hope would remain that someday she would regain consciousness. However, if doctors were to run tests and determine there is irreversible damage and that it is proven she would not regain consciousness, then that would be something to really
consider. Step five we are to compare the values and alternatives. The value in the alternative, as previously stated, would be if Nancy could someday come out of her vegetative state. Also, that she still remains alive and the value of her life as a human being were to be taken into consideration. Although, I do not see a value in life if there is no way of communication or consciousness. Asses the consequences is our next to last step in this model, step six. Consequences that could pose a risk short-term in this case is if they were to remove the feeding tube too early before determining if there is irreversible damage. The long-term consequences to be considered with the alternative, would be keeping her alive but she could potentially suffer from other health issues. Finally, step seven there is a decision to be made. Weighing out the sole decision’s pro’s and con’s and comparing them to the alternative courses can bring us to a conclusion on which decision would be best for Nancy. For this case, I do believe in removing the feeding tube would be the best decision for the patient. In conclusion, I do believe that the decision made to remove Nancy from her feeding tube was an ethical decision. This is due to the fact that it was her wishes that she did not want to remain in a vegetative state if it were to occur. Also, keeping a person alive that can no longer communicate and to lay and suffer until her body completely shuts down seems more unethical to me rather than to end her suffering, so she did have the right to die.

References
Fremgen, Bonnie F. (2012) Medical Law and Ethics. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.