Ethical Dilemmas Surrounding MAID
Medical assistance in dying (MAID) has always been a disputable question. It introduces an ethical dilemma, as health workers should care for patients and help them live as long as possible. However, from another perspective, an individual can manage their own life as they want, and the cessation of suffering is another critical goal of the healthcare sector. For this reason, MAID is one of the issues that attracts a lot of attention.
Legal Restrictions and Arguments for Advance Directives in Canada
In Canada, the advance directives for MAID are not permitted. The legislation on this issue was introduced in June 2016. It tried to balance the rights for autonomy and protection of people who might be vulnerable or coerced into ending their lives. As a result, the framework for regulating the issue emerged, implying that the suffering of people in complex conditions might be relieved, including palliative care (Konder & Christie, 2019). However, it is vital to protect those who might be pressed to accept the decision.
Regardless of the decision mentioned above, there are arguments for and against permitting advanced directives or MAID. Some individuals view it as an act of compassion that is necessary to end suffering and preserve patients’ dignity (Carpenter & Vivas, 2020). That is why, from the perspective of virtue ethics, MAID can be both acceptable and unacceptable. On the one hand, it is a good action embodying compassion and wisdom (Jordan, 2017).
At the same time, it leads to a person’s death, which is an undesired behavior regarding the framework. Furthermore, from the utilitarian ethical ideology, MAID can be considered an acceptable procedure. The framework gives more attention to the consequences of a specific action rather than to its moral underpinning (Jordan, 2017). This means that society can accept the end of the suffering of a terminally ill person with no chances for recovery.
Balancing Autonomy, Safeguards, and Vulnerability
Speaking about MAID, it is also vital to consider the principles of autonomy and beneficence. Thus, autonomy is paramount for the modern healthcare sector. The patient’s desire to plan their care should be respected, meaning that MAID can be viewed as an acceptable procedure. However, in many cases, patients might be misinformed about the nuances of their treatment, which violates the principle of beneficence (Khawaja & Khawaja, 2021).
Moreover, clients might have issues with cognition, such as in the case, which might impact their decisions. For this reason, I believe that advance directives for MADI should be permitted. It will help to avoid severe ethical issues and situations when persons are forced to plan the procedure or make a wrong decision.
However, if MAID is permitted, specific safeguards are critical to avoid poor outcomes. First, providers of the procedure might experience pressure from patients and families (Koksvik, 2020). For this reason, it is vital to ensure they are isolated from all parties to ensure their objectivity and enhanced protection for vulnerable populations. Second, allowing MAID for people with mental illnesses or disorders can damage patients (Simpson, 2018). For this reason, it is essential to evaluate clients’ mental status.
Finally, people from vulnerable groups can make decisions to end life because of the inability to access medical treatments and social support (Tran et al., 2022). That is why it is vital to guarantee that clients are provided with the necessary care to ensure the decision is not made because of the fear of pain or lack of medications to manage their conditions. These steps might help to make MAID risky for vulnerable populations and avoid violation of legal issues.
References
Carpenter, T., & Vivas, L. (2020). Ethical arguments against coercing provider participation in MAiD (medical assistance in dying) in Ontario, Canada. BMC Medical Ethics, 21(46). Web.
Jordan, M. (2017). The ethical considerations of physician-assisted suicide. Dialogue & Nexus, 4, 1-7. Web.
Khawaja, M., & Khawaja, A. (2021). The ethics of dying: Deciphering pandemic-resultant pressures that influence elderly patients’ medical assistance in dying (MAiD) decisions. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(16), 8819. Web.
Konder, R. M., & Christie, T. (2019). Medical assistance in dying (MAiD) in Canada: A critical analysis of the exclusion of vulnerable populations. Healthcare policy/Politiques de santé, 15(2), 28–38. Web.
Koksvik, G. (2020). Practical and ethical complexities of MAiD: Examples from Quebec. Wellcome Open Research, 5, 227. Web.
Simpson, F. (2018). Medical assistance in dying and mental health: A legal, ethical, and clinical analysis. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry. Revue Canadienne de Psychiatrie, 63(2), 80–84. Web.
Tran, M., Honarmand, K., Sibbald, R., Priestap, F., Oczkowski, S., & Ball I. (2022). Socioeconomic status and medical assistance in dying: A regional descriptive study. Journal of Palliative Care, 37(3):359-365.