Question

In 1990 Helga Wanglie, an 86 year old woman, suffered cardiopulmonary failure. She was put on a respirator, fed intravenously and injected with antibiotics. Although she remained in a vegetative state, her family insisted that she be kept alive. For the next 17 months $800,000 was expended on her maintenance. As we continue to make breakthroughs in medical technology, we increase our ability to extend life in situations that previously guaranteed death. Consider the above situation, similar to the more recent Terri Schiavo case. Consider the abilities we’ve gained with stem cell technology, which has now allowed us to grow new organs. The rapid advancement of medical technology has helped humans to gain enormous control over life and death. But with great power become great responsibility and brings to light considerable ethical concerns.

After reading the module notes and all supplemental materials, respond to following:

What arguments can be made in favor of prolonging life?

What arguments can be made against it?

Just because we have the technology, should it be used? Where is the line drawn?

Should there be regulation? To what extent?

Answer 1

What arguments can be made in favor of prolonging life?

No one wants their near and dear ones to die. So if a person has a chance to live(even in a vegetative state), there is nothing wrong in wanting to save him or her. The cost can be high, for example in the above case, it was $800,000 for keeping Helga alive. But as long as the family members can afford, they can keep their loved one alive, as long as they wish.

What arguments can be made against it?

Although the intent of the family members is good, it increases the suffering of the patient. At a certain stage, a person may want to be free from the pain. A person in a vegetative state cannot respond, but we can never be sure if he is suffering from pain inside.

Just because we have the technology, should it be used? Where is the line drawn?Should there be regulation? To what extent?

Such technologies are a boon, but should be used long-term only if the patient has hope of getting better. If the patient is in vegetative state with no hope, it is better to let the person go. This is easier said than done,ofcourse. Also, we live in a world with limited resources. If all the hospitals are occupied with such patients, it will be difficult to find place for people who actually have hope.

Yes, there should be a regulation. With growing economy, the spending capacity of people has gone up over a period of time. With money in their hands, families can mess up with the medical system, in absence of rules. One example of regulation can be that a person in vegetative state can be given prolonged life only for a certain amount of time.