Ordinary Treatment: An Ethical Dilemma

If you have the capacity to make a decision, you have the capacity to refuse treatment. If you do not have the capacity to make the decision, a surrogate decision maker can do so for you as long as they are acting your values, wishes, and morals. If you were to have an end-of-life document, this would make things much less complicated for said decision maker.
Some would argue that is morally wrong to refuse ordinary treatment versus extraordinary treatment, this has been the topic for many articles and conferences. Is it morally acceptable to let a patient refuse a feeding tube, the first round of chemo, and/or antibiotics? Is it morally acceptable to let a patient refuse a high risk and painful surgery that has a low chance of beating the disease? There is no easy answer when it comes to medical ethics.

Ordinary Treatment:
Extraordinary Treatment:
-Lower risk of harm -Higher risk of harm
-Routine and lower tech -Complex and higher tech
-Better chance of patient benefit -Lower chance of patient benefit
-Usually inexpensive -Usually expensive
-Available to most in need -Not available to all
-Causes less pain and distress -Can be painful and cause distress
-Usually beneficial to patient -Small chance of patient benefit

Webster’s dictionary defines Euthanasia as: the act or practice of killing or permitting the death of hopelessly sick or injured individuals (as persons or domestic animals) in a relatively painless way for reasons of mercy.
How much care is too much? Medical professionals are taught from the beginning to do everything possible to preserve the life of their patient. New physicians take an oath called the Hippocratic Oath that originated in Greece. The message of the oath is “first do no harm,” although this phrase isn’t found anywhere in the actual text. Euthanasia goes against the morals that you think would come naturally to medical staff.
That being said, another thing is true of medical staff, they do not want to see anyone in their care suffer, let alone needlessly. Even the slightest of pin prick, the staff doesn’t want to cause pain. Yes, they would love to see the patient be well again, but at what
cost?
The decisions are always made on a case-by-case basis and no two are alike. There are different needs and each individual has a unique situation. For a doctor to give their consent to let a terminally ill patient suffer would be morally wrong. That same could be said for the opposite. For a doctor to give their consent to euthanize a perfectly healthy patient would also be morally wrong. Both situations end in death. All situations regarding euthanasia end in death. Same could be said for our lives, they all end in death.
Ordinary care is basic care from trained medical staff. Anything less can be considered (by some) to be neglectful. If the care helps you to live a healthier life, then it is beneficial to seek the treatment. It is basic human nature to have the desire to stay on this planet as long as possible and live a long prosperous life. Ordinary care can help us to do so. Most would like to achieve a swift and painless death, that is not always easily achievable. When health is no longer on our side, extraordinary care can be an option.
A patient dealing with prolonged suffering, a terminal illness, or who is in intense pain may wish to seek extraordinary care. They may choose to have every painful, expensive, high risk procedure done to try prolong their life. Holding on to any chance of life, that one last ditch effort that just might work. That “extraordinary” treatment that worked on the lab mice, maybe it’ll work on them. That may not be what they want, they may just want to let go.
They may want “the good death,” to be free of suffering and pain. This could mean palliative care, highly dosed on medications until they are ready for hospice care. It could mean that they are unable to make the decision for themselves and a third party has to do so for them. There is also mercy “killing” euthanasia situations as well. All of these situations are simply helping people end their suffering.
Rachels would say that any form of euthanasia is intentional killing, and therefore wrong. Sullivan would say that it intention based. I say do what you want with your body. If you are ever forced to make the decision for someone you love, do what you know they would want. Skip both ordinary and ordinary care if you want. You define your own set of morals, your own right and wrong. As I write this, and as you read this, we are slowly dying. Let’s take charge of how we do it.