Bioethicist

The goal of a bioethicist is to advise doctors and inform the general population of the ethics behind major scientific breakthroughs that may seem taboo. They also may assist the patient or his or her family to make decisions regarding how they should go about a certain procedure or form of care for the patient. The ethicist will need to remind society of what is best for the patient. Presented in these next paragraphs are scenarios in which the consultation of an ethicist is required. In the first situation, the first way to address the issue of organ shortages is to promote the need for educating the lay people, who may not know of the great need for organs or be misinformed of how the process works. This can be done through news reports
The end of life matters have become a huge debate recently in the world of medicine and there are two sides to every topic. Assisted suicide has risen in this century, as people are living longer and may come to a point when their quality of life is unhappiness. They may be living with terrible pain or be suffering from a disease, in which their loved ones struggle to watch them slowly die. By being assisted to die, they are relieving pain early on, from both themselves and their family. In this method, they can choose their point of death, which in a sense allows them to die with dignity. While assisted suicide could have a potential to become out of hand, as seen with Kevorkian1, in a controlled state, as seen in Oregon, it is regulated so that the person will go through psychological evaluation and cool down period before they can receive the pills to end their life. However, a major question on the minds of most people will be the rationality behind an assisted death. If a person is not so near death that something could be done for him or her, is it wrong to allow them to end their life when it could be saved? While it is true that people should not be forced to suffer, there is palliative care in which a patient’s pain could alleviated and allow them to live a little longer in peace. Lastly, the whole idea is contradictory to the ideals of medicine, which it is always about helping
It is her autonomy and therefore, she can act as she wishes with her own body. If it were illegal for an assisted suicide to occur, her ending of life could be justified by consent, as Miss Bouvia had been in a similar situation in which she had the right to tell the doctors whether she wanted to continue life support. As it has been justified before in a court of law, the same would be applied to Mary. Her consent was granted, as there would be “clear and convincing evidence,” [3] to her case, with two witnesses, one of which being a doctor. It can also be warranted in that her pain would be alleviated and she was given a death with dignity, as ALS is a paralysis that shuts one’s body down over time; this would be degrading death as one would slowly waste away. By granting her this choice, Mary may die on her own terms and in better health than she would be if she waited for the disease to finish her