There are also other groups that consider euthanasia as a form of elimination of specific groups of individuals in society. Since euthanasia is administered to chronically ill patients, then it is possible to think that the only individuals who are allowed to continue on living are those that are deemed healthy. A similar situation has been observed through history, when thousands of Jews were murdered during World War II (Benedict and Georges, 2009). This mass destruction specifically targeted a particular group in society.
Another example would involve the incarceration of individuals that showed particular physical features that were then correlated with criminality, such a broad noses and foreheads. It is thus possible that euthanasia may be a modified version of eugenics, or the elimination of specific individuals that show characteristics that were considered of poor quality (Jotkowitz, 2008). This kind of selection among individuals is often observed around the world in different forms or presentations.
It is thus important to understand the concept of euthanasia, as well as the mechanisms that influence its acceptable and implementation in different parts of the world. CONCLUSION Euthanasia pertains to a very controversial topic that is related to healthcare because it involves that induction of death in a patient who is considered to be in the terminal stages of a medical condition. Euthanasia may be implemented through active and passive means, depending on the method of implementation.
The process of inducing death in a patient may be requested by a patient, the family or the physician, and thus it is important that each of these individuals understand the implications of the procedure. There is still a need to better understand the forces behind that acceptance of euthanasia in specific countries. It has been highly speculated that euthanasia is treated as a solution to medical conditions where the patient feels that he could no longer take any more suffering and misery in his current medical condition. The employment of alternative treatments should be considered in order to dissuade patients from considering euthanasia.
References
Andrews, J. (2008). Get me out of here. Nursing and Older People, 20,3. Benedict, S, and Georges, J. M. (2009). Nurses in the Nazi “euthanasia” program: A critical feminist analysis. ANS Advances in Nursing Science, 32,63-74. Brits, L. , Human, L. , Pieterse, L. , Sonnekus, P. and Joubert. G. (2009). Opinions of private medical practitioners in Bloemfontein, South Africa, regarding euthanasia of terminally ill patients. Journal of Medical Ethics, 35,180-182. Chong, A. M. and Fok, S. Y. (2009). Attitudes toward euthanasia: Implications for social work practice. Social Work and Health Care, 48,119-133.
Crawford, D. and Way, C. (2009). Just because we can, should we? A discussion of treatment withdrawal. Paediatric Nursing, 21,22-25. Curtis, J. R. , Patrick, D. L. , Caldwell, E. S. and Collier, A. C. (2000). Why don’t patients and physicians talk about end-of-life care? Barriers to communication for patients with acquired immunodeficiency syndrome and their primary care clinicians. Archives in Internal Medicine, 160,1690-1696. De Vries, M. C. and Verhagen, A. A. (2008). A case against something that is not the case: The Groningen Protocol and the moral principle of non-maleficence. Amercian Journal of Bioethics, 8,29-31.