Navigating the Ethical Dilemma of Euthanasia: Patient Autonomy vs. Professional Obligations

Name Institutional affiliations Date To date, euthanasia has never been settled, and conflicts surrounding it have never been sorted. In countries like Netherlands, Belgium, and Luxembourg, where euthanasia is legal, many people have opted for the service. Some people are usually ready to die to save them the agony of pain and suffering. On the other hand, some patients may be incapacitated to the extent that they may not be able to make such decisions, and their next of kin are forced to make the decisions for them. But it is not an easy task, especially in situations that may incorporate a non-supporter of euthanasia. Take an example of a terminally ill person who would want the euthanasia service. The doctors would like to fulfill the withes of the terminally ill patient. But the head of the doctors is a religious person who believes that euthanasia is just murder in camouflage. The head doctor believes in preserving life and argues that only the creator of humans has a right to end that life. Therefore, the suffering patient must be left to die naturally, and no assisted death should be done on the patient. With this, the doctors are ethically bound by responsibilities and respect for their seniors. Even if they want to fulfill the patient’s wishes, they must listen to their superior says. Either the junior doctors could aid the patient is having a peaceful death behind their superior's back or let the patient suffer to the last day. Else, the junior doctor would recommend someone who would fulfill the family and the patient’s wishes. In such a scenario, the case would cause a professional conflict and also self-conflict. In such an instance, what would be the best thing to do? If one does not have value for life, there is surely no need to prolong it. The desi