Medical Ethics Assisted Suicide & Euthanasia

The dilemma in the case of John H. is the disagreement between the two specialists handling his case. Because of John's immediate condition (internal bleeding), the doctors disagree as to whether they should obey John's wishes from earlier or whether they should follow his immediate request for assistance. Perhaps the real dilemma is John's lack of specificity regarding his wishes. In the case that his condition continue to deteriorate at the present rate, he wants the do not resuscitate. Yet in the case of a spontaneous and unforeseen complication, he wants the former order suspended for immediate care. Whether or not the doctors decide to take immediate action on John H., it is still quite likely he will die from pancreatic cancer. Whether or not John is fully coherent at the...

If the doctors make the attempt and fail, then they made their best efforts to treat John as well as adhere to his wishes, but in his state, his death is probable.
I think the most appropriate response in John's case is for both doctors first to confer and hopefully reach the same conclusion: whether or not they try to stop John's internal bleeding, he is likely to die. Since John did make a last minute request for assistance, there seems no more unreasonable harm that usual to follow his wishes and try to provide immediate assistance. The most appropriate response would be to inform John as well, if he is still conscious of the decision the doctors make.…