The debate surrounding euthanasia requires extensive ethical and medical knowledge to be applied. Although numerous scholars have presented their overviews of the topic, additional insights are still being introduced by novel research. A study by Emanuel et al. (2016), Attitudes and Practices of Euthanasia and Physician-Assisted Suicide in the United States, Canada, and Europe, provides a comprehensive examination of current academic positions and available information. Originally sponsored and published by the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) as a Special Communications issue, this article had been cited numerous times, prompting further inquiries into this field. I encountered this text on the Google Scholar platform, which offers access to countless academic research papers.
The study discussed is a prominent example of a reliable investigation focused on demonstrating credible results. First of all, as a publication of JAMA, this work was thoroughly examined and peer-reviewed by professionals from relevant scientific fields, meaning that the presented materials were deemed valuable and reliable. After that, the authors of this investigation have received the necessary credentials to conduct scholarly research and are associated with distinguished educational institutions, such as the University of Pennsylvania and Ghent University. Furthermore, the data used in this article was derived from governmental and official medical organizations, including such information as legal acts and death certificate studies. Therefore, I believe that the published findings can be referred to as highly trustworthy and authentic.
An essential trait of a scientific publication is its usefulness to the academic community. The study described states a clear objective to be accomplished, aiming to provide a clear overview of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide (PAS) practices and attitudes in selected countries. The thesis suggested by the authors is based on the recently observed trends in euthanasia and PAS application, stating that the legalization of these procedures becomes more common throughout the world. By extrapolating evidence from the nations’ governmental institutions, the article investigates contemporary approaches to euthanasia, presenting feasible data regarding the legal implementations and frequently encountered issues. Moreover, clinician and public attitudes are also assessed, allowing the scholars to ascertain personal perspectives and compare them with legal interpretations.
As the study utilizes both survey and statistical information, it efficiently explores both euthanasia strategies and noteworthy professional standpoints. In this regard, insights from Emanuel et al. (2016) are especially valuable for defining the scope of euthanasia activities and pertinent applications of these techniques in different countries. Considering that positive trends towards euthanasia and PAS legalization and lack of abuse are reported, this research clarifies that such practices are regarded as highly beneficial for the population. In addition, it supports the claim that endorsing euthanasia can positively affect terminally ill patients, including individuals with severe psychological disorders. Finally, this evidence may be used as a counter-claim against the negative ramifications of euthanasia, as no significant tendencies of mistreatment were observed.
To conclude, the study evaluated in this work appears to be an excellent example of a credible and useful academic publication, valuable for the ongoing project. Emanuel et al. (2016) thoroughly investigate the approaches and attitudes towards euthanasia and PAS in several countries, offering feasible findings retrieved from official data. As the article was assessed by distinguished scholars and presented by a national academic association, its conclusions can be considered trustworthy. Given the extensive account of euthanasia strategies and potential complications, this study is especially valuable for supporting the project’s arguments on the benefits of euthanasia and PAS.
During source evaluation, I primarily considered the origin of the article and the methods used in its creation. Establishing the credibility of the publishing institution and the authors’ credentials is essential for understanding the quality of the research. After that, I aimed to critically examine data apprehension and analysis strategies, ensuring that contemporary scholarly approaches are implemented. I believe that this practice can aid me in finding and reviewing supplementary materials to support my argument. By assessing the text’s contributors, publishing source, and methods, I can improve the statements’ value and make sure that only reliable evidence is incorporated in the project.
Reference
Emanuel, E. J., Onwuteaka-Philipsen, B. D., Urwin, J. W., & Cohen, J. (2016). Attitudes and practices of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide in the United States, Canada, and Europe. JAMA, 316(1), 79–90.