What I found most interesting about my topic for Assignment 1

  

I’ve always been a supporter of euthanasia, so when choosing a topic for assignment 1 I was immediately drawn to the concept of legalising organ donation euthanasia.   

  

We have so many rights in our lives (and so many people choose to make some bizarre decisions with theirs!!!) because it’s "our life". 

 

Surely as fully consenting adults, we should be able to choose to take certain actions over our own bodies, so long as it doesn’t harm or disadvantage any other human being of course?

 

According to the natural law moral theory – everyone is permitted to do as they please as long as they don’t violate anyone else's rights.  

  

My research did lead me to ponder certain aspects of euthanasia however. 

  

For a very personal perspective to the taking of one’s own life, I lost my brother to suicide nearly 11 years ago.  Whilst he was also mentally ill, through sharing a needle whilst injecting heroin he developed Hepatitis C.  His suicide was not exactly a shock to my parents or I as it was his third attempt, however we were later advised by a friend of his that he didn’t want to go through the pain and potential death from Hepatitis C. 

  

This brought up for me a few interesting points in the euthanasia debate.   

  

1. None of us know whether his Hepatitis C was going to kill him, or even be a long painful struggle, but the fact is he didn’t want to face it.  Should euthanasia be legalised then would he be able to choose it?  Or is there a burden of proof on the patient to be at a certain level of pain and suffering before he can choose this?  Given it was his third suicide attempt – third time lucky! – he was definitely committed to going through with it. 

2. The second thing, which you are probably already thinking about, is his mental state.  He was diagnosed bipolar after many years of using methamphetamines.  So would the legalisation of euthanasia allow him to choose to die?  What protocols, processes and procedures would there be?  Who would make the decision and what information would they use to make it? 

3. Finally, should he have wanted organ donation euthanasia, what organs would he have been able to donate?  Having a lived a life of drugs from the age of probably 17 until his death at 29, what damage was done?  Clearly the Hep C would have damaged his liver. 

 

Anyway, the above was in no way meant to make you feel down, I've dealt with his death and I feel he's where he wanted to be - wherever that is!!!!!  I just wanted to share with you some thoughts that I had been pondering since we started this topic.

Week 3

To ODE or not to ODE, that is the question....  

So, as I mentioned earlier (if you've been paying attention!), my position paper topic is the legalisation of organ donation euthanasia or ODE.

The "pro" argument"

 

Whilst the article I’ve chosen to write about below "Should we allow organ donation euthanasia? Alternatives for maximizing the number and quality of organs for transplantation", talks about both positions on the subject, I found I referred more to their “pro” points than their “con” arguments. 

Both Professors Wilkinson and Savulescu work in medical ethics, with Julian Savulescu having researched levels of consciousness in patients in a vegetative state.  The fact that he openly supports withdrawing life support I would imagine leads him to seeing the benefit of ODE. 

 

Some of the main points I used from this the paper are summarised below: 

1. Every year organ donors die of terminal illness whilst the requirement for more organs increases.

2. Often, due to the circumstances and timing of their death, donors are unable to be give their organs when they pass away.  Instead they are buried or cremated, while others die on the organ waiting list.

3. It is already common practice for families to allow medical professionals to withdraw life support in cases of extremely poor diagnosis to allow patients to die.  ODE would likely be less painful than death from life support withdrawal. 

4. ODE has the potential for one person to save or improve the lives of up to 9 other individuals! 👦👧👦👧👦👧👦👦

5. A massive cost of not legalising ODE is the unnecessary deaths of patients waiting for organs. In 2007 in America, 18 patients per day died on the transplant waiting list and in the UK, on average 450 patients die every year (Wilkinson & Savulescu 2010)!!!!  Astonishing figures! 😲

 

The "con" argument"

One information source I used to research and discuss the side for not legalising ODE, is a Journal of Medical Ethics article by Professor Potts with the thought provoking title of "Does it matter that organ donors are not dead? Ethical and policy implications." 

 

As a Professor of Philosophy specialising in medical ethics and philosophy of religion I can certainly see why Potts finds himself strongly on this side of the debate.  This article raised some very interesting counter points to the argument (and my belief!) that ODE be legalised, three of which are summarised below.  

1. Brain death should not be compared to or considered a "death" at all.  Whilst the brain is no longer functioning, the rest of the body remains alive, nothing.   

2. Potts argues that when life support is withdrawn it is the disease, or failure of the body as a result of the disease, which claims the life of the patient.  However the removal of an unpaired organ (such as the heart or liver) is what leads to the patient’s death, and in that case they are effectively “killed” by the surgeon. 

3. Further he argues that the job of the medical profession is to help the unwell and that ODE is effectively killing patients and gives them an unethical level of power over human life.

These above points and others cetainly had me constantly questioning my original standing on this issue.  But in the end I found my self still standing true to my belief on the subject of organ donation euthanasia. 

I wonder if this brief summary has made you question your point of view........💭??


References 

 

Potts, M. (2005). Does it matter that organ donors are not dead? Ethical and policy implications. Journal of Medical Ethics, 31(7), 406–409. doi:10.1136/jme.2004.010298 

 

Wilkinson, D., & Savulescu, J. (2010). Should we allow organ donation euthanasia? Alternatives for maximizing the number and quality of organs for transplantation. Bioethics, 26(1), 32–48. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8519.2010.01811.x  

Warning! 97% of statistics are made up on the spot

Whilst that is a funny joke which I’ve told on many occasions (and most laugh at quite quickly) I've never realised just how close to the truth it is!  

 

OK, so even though I'm blonde, I've never been naive enough to think that everything on the internet should be believed.  However it wasn't until searching for information on scientific topics this and last semester did I realise just how little information is actually verified as correct.  I mean some websites say Justin Bieber has talent! 

 

Even many published articles and news articles can't really be relied upon to be true.  However I guess that's understandable given we know the media sensationalise things to get viewers and/or readers. 

 

Many people go straight to Wikipedia for a definition, a date, or an explanation, which is probably fine if it's just for general knowledge.  However a Wikipedia page can be written by anyone, edited by anyone and is probably not checked for accuracy.  So it should only be used as a last resort, or when you check the references at the bottom of each page and whether or not they are scholarly peer reviewed articles.  

 

There were many interesting stories and news items that I found, but I didn't want to cite them as I couldn't be sure of their validity and truth. 

 

My search did however bring me to this beauty ""The problem with internet quotes is that you cant always depend on their accuracy" - Abraham Lincoln, 1864" (Cheezburger, 2016). 

 

A website I did find useful however, was official website for Organ Donation New Zealand. It was very helpful for New Zealand specific statistics, as was their 2015 annual report.  Also legislation.govt.nz was a great source to understand the current legislation when it comes to organ donation and euthanasia in New Zealand. 

 

I am grateful that my fist University paper last semester required me to write essays using scholarly articles.  So I feel I am reasonably au fait with the Massy Library service, and as distance students we are incredibly lucky to have such a resource available to us.  

 

For this assignment I have tried to limit my searches on the Massey Article Database to peer reviewed articles only, by checking the box to filter any non-peer reviewed results out of my search.  I hadn't known I could do this until the Week 1 lessons, so that was a great learning. 

 

Quite interestingly I found so much information for and against my topic that reading it often made me question the position that I was going to take! How a paper, essay or article is written can often sway you one way or another.  I guess this is exactly what we are aiming to do with our position papers!  It makes me wonder if some of the long held and strong beliefs that I have could potentially be swayed by a good arguments with solid facts. I also had to admit at times I had to take the emotion out of what I was reading because it could be quite clinical and cold. Imagine what it's like for the medical professionals! 

 

Finally you four, my team with whom I am working on assignments 2 and 3, have been a great source of feedback.  Although most of us are working on different topics, the general chat around organ donation and research methods that we have been having in advance of the next two assignments has been very valuable – so thank you! 

 

 

Reference 

 

Cheezburger. (2016). “The problem with internet quotes is that you cant always depend on their accuracy”

          -Abraham Lincoln, 1864. Retrieved December 2, 2016, from http://cheezburger.com/4777806080