Life Support Is the Methodology

Life Support is the methodology in which modern technology implements machines in order to sustain life in critical situations. Modern technology has offered more and more advanced tools of life support. However, there are several key issues which prove that life support is not always one-hundred percent beneficial, and these have raised some serious ethical questions. Despite it proving inefficient for some areas of the population, life support does prove beneficial in the resuscitation of many individuals.

According to the dictionary of medical terminology offered by MedicineNet.com, the term life support refers to "A therapy or device designed to preserve someone's life when an essential bodily system is not doing so," (Medicine Net, 2008). When an individual patient's body is too weak or incapacitated for whatever reason, the various implementations of life support can keep that patient alive during a crucial moment in their situations. Various devices have been developed and perfected in order to keep the functionality of the body performing even when some physical trauma or illness has prevented the body to do so naturally. These devices include features which keep the body nourished, such as enteric feeding in which the patient relies on nourishment through tube feeding, (Medicine Net, 2008).

Basic essential bodily functions are also supported through protection of both heart and lung function. A defibrillator is implemented in many cases in order to prevent the heart from stopping or falling into an irregular pattern which would further endanger the health of the patient under life support. A pacemaker is also sometimes implemented to prevent such an occurrence, (Medicine Net, 2008). Other machines are used as key elements of life support in keeping the lungs bringing in essential oxygen, while the body is too weak or unresponsive enough to voluntarily breathe.

Life support proves beneficial to many individuals who have had a trauma which led them into a vegetative state or coma. If the individual patient is suffering from one medial condition, research shows these patients have a better chance of resuscitation, (Katz-Wise, 2006).

This gives many doctors and professionals valuable time to find new ways to fight what is inflicting the individual to a state of true incapacitation. The American Medical Situation has recently implemented a program to further inform emergency medical life support in the event of a disaster or encounter which such needs, (American Medical Association, 2007). This provides necessary tools for emergency staff in the field, where trauma proves most detrimental in the earliest periods.

Despite the positive ramifications of life support, as well as the second chance it gives to those who are in dire need of specialized care, there are many individuals and groups who have string criticisms in regards to the ethics of using life support. Strong religious beliefs set a counter argument in the idea that we as mankind are not supposed to decide when and how a person is to die, so how could it be in our power to decide to keep someone alive when all of their natural bodily functions have failed them, (General Council of the Assemblies of God, 2008). Many religious figures have announced their arguments against using life support in order to preserve a type of religious order. One of the major concerns of opponents to using life support in various situations is the idea that the patient might be suffering in a direct result of keeping him or her alive without consent or even ability to express what their true wish would be, (General Council of the Assemblies of God, 2008). There have been many cases recently where a family was burdened with the painful decision to keep their loved one's on life support or to end the sustaining machines. Several of these cases have unfortunately been exploited by the media, which furthered the pain and confusion of the family members involved.

Additionally, life support also proves to fail those who are suffering from chronic illnesses, (Katz-Wise, 2006). Patients diagnosed with terminal cancer are less likely to benefit from life-support due to their initial diagnoses. Also, patients diagnosed with dementia are sometimes not advised to reap the benefits involved with methodologies of life support, (Katz-Wise, 2006). There are also several other serious risks to individuals due to rash nature of the methods used in life support, "People in a frail condition who receive CPR, mechanical ventilation, or both generally do not have results as good as people who are healthy," (Katz-Wise, 2006).