eorge is a twenty-three-year-old young man with Down\'s syndrome. Until three ye
ID: 203476 • Letter: E
Question
eorge is a twenty-three-year-old young man with Down's syndrome. Until three years ago, he lived at home with his parents and had a part-time job washing dishes at a restaurant. When George turned twenty, he and his parents decided that living in a group home would be a good experience for him and he entered into his new life enthusiastically. George and his parents have a good relationship and they have always encouraged him to be prudently independent. George has often brought his good friend, Stan, home for supper. They both live at the home for developmentally disabled young men, and his parents are happy that he has found a friend. But one Saturday, George and Stan were waiting for a bus and in the course of some horseplay, Stan accidentally pushed George too hard and he fell in front of the bus. He suffers from severe brain injury, has no swallowing reflex and has had a feeding tube placed. A year has passed. The parents visit George each day at the rehabilitation hospital, but he has shown no signs of consciousness. Stan is devastated by George's condition and the parents permit him to visit once a week, although the young man would prefer to be there every day The doctor has requested a Do Not Resuscitate Order for George and the parents have signed it although they are not legally declared his guardians. But now they are talking to the doctor about removing the feeding tube. It is not instrumental in restoring him to any quality of life and they realize that it would be better that George simply be allowed to die. George and his parents live in a state that requires "cdear and convincing evidence" for withholding/withdrawing nutrition and hydration, and they are feeling hard pressed to provide such evidence. They have not talked with George about dying in the beginning, it was not relevant; now they wish they had helped him make his advance directive. Even if they have themselves declared his guardian they live in a state that does not permit guardians to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining treatment.Explanation / Answer
1. Ethics are actually a sort of feeling or more appropriately a moral principle which comes into existence when we are dealing or considering anything which has a life. It is ethics that make humans different from other living creature on earth. Similarly, the given situation of George also compels us to think about ethical issues. George is a down syndrome patient and now due to accident declared by doctors as brain dead. He passively being alive through a feeding tube and that makes no hope among his parents and doctors. But as George is a human it's his parents and doctors moral responsibility to provide all facilities to him for treatment until he survives or dies natural death. No one is allowed to make him die by withdrawing nutrition and hydration. This ideology points out the ethical responsibilities of us towards George and is very necessary to be taken into consideration here.
2. No, it is not ethically appropriate to remove the feeding tube because in my opinion no one is allowed to do an act which leads to the death of a human. It is against the moral teachings and ethical practices and so it should not be allowed. However, some medical conditions arise where patient himself/herself give consent to remove life support and commit a sort of suicide with help of others due to critical condition with almost no chances of recovery for example euthanasia.
3. No, parents of George didn't ask Stan and other boys at the group home about George opinion on the subject of end of his life.
Related Questions
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.