Advantages And Disadvantages Of Physician Assisted Suicide Philosophy Essay

Advantages And Disadvantages Of Physician Assisted Suicide Philosophy Essay Physician assisted-suicide is a personal decision which helps end a sufferings life. Physician assisted-suicide can affect a family physically and mentally. Physician-assisted suicide is the most common type of assisted suicide. Physician assisted-suicide or euthanasia describes any case in which a doctor gives a patient the means to carry out their own suicide. This  medical procedure  is most commonly carried out on people with  terminal illnesses. Physician assisted-suicide is a controversial issue worldwide. Physician assisted-suicide has both  pros and cons. When a person is suffering from aterminal illness  they are already physically suffering, and should have the right to decide how they want to die. A terminal illness is where either way the person is going to die in a certain amount of time and cant control it. However, physician assisted-suicide is illegal in 47 states, therefore there has to be some type of problem. Physician assisted-suicide should be legal for the people who are already suffering from terminal illnesses. They should not have to suffer anymore. Physician assisted-suicide is necessary in order to put human rights in place. Physician assisted-suicide has many disadvantages. Physician assisted-suicide has many disadvantages because in some states it is not legal and therefore if a physician goes through with the practice the physician will loose their license and can face getting sued. This has happened a few times and is a major problem. Washington and Oregon are currently the only states that permit physician-assisted suicide. Some physicians are not ok with aiding patients in dying, but that is normally not the problem. In source 3 by Reyes B.J, it states that Senate bill 803 prohibits  mercy killings,  lethal injections, and active euthanasia, and requires patients to receive informed consent. This explains that if a physician or doctor under any circumstances attempts to perform the suicide in states that it is not legal in, then there will be serious legal consequences. The Senate bill 803 protects the act of physician assisted- suicide. Although many people have their doubts about physician assisted-suicide there are many advantages of physician assisted-suicide. One positive thing about physician assisted-suicide is that physician assisted-suicide gives you the right to decide how you would like to die. In source 4 written by Lee M and Alexander Stingl he discusses the Right to die  debate. The Right to die Debate discusses whether or not people should have the right to die how they want. Many people could argue this because many people have different opinions on this personal issue. This is important because dying is considered a human right. Also ODDA (Oregons  Death with Dignity Act) permits physicians to assist terminally ill patients to end their own lives by writing prescriptions for  lethal doses  of medication. This means that in the United States, suicide, is no longer against the law. However Physician assisted-suicide still is not legal all throughout the United States. This is because instead of just the individual taking their own life someone else is involved, this makes the issue more complicated because there are legal actions that have to be put in place if anything happens that isnt supposed to. On the other hand physician assisted-suicide impacts some people differently. For example physician assisted-suicide is against the teachings of many religions, such as Catholicism, and some people feel as if it is unfair and unnecessary and against human morals. It is against some religions because physician assisted-suicide is not mentioned in religious readings for example the bible, and God does not believe in physician assisted-suicide. John Pearson writes about how legalizing physician assisted-suicide is unnecessary and painful, both physically and emotionally. If suicide was right then it would have been discovered throughout the ages by the great thinkers in law, ethics, and philosophy. If suicide was right it would have been mentioned in the bible and thats the reason that it is not classified as necessary and why people think it is against certain religions. The term  Euthanasia  was taken from the Greek word easy death. This is because it provides a quick and  painless death. In some scenarios physician assisted-suicide is best. One example of a scenario where physician assisted-suicide was best, was for Sandra Wiener. This 64 year old woman was lucky to die how she wanted. This particular woman prepared for her own death. Her physician described physician assisted-suicide as an unmentionable, intensely private procedure. Even though the 64 year old knew that what was being done was illegal at the time, her physician still carried out with the procedure. Doing this, she was committing a class E felony. However, it was best for Sandra Wiener, because she was terminally ill and suffering. In the eyes of the law, there have only been 3 acceptable ways involved with taking a life. Killing in self-defense, killing in war, and in the case of capital punishment. Physician assisted-suicide has never been looked upon as right. Many persons who want to legalize assisted suicide probably never looked at the risks that could happen if assisted suicide is legalized. If assisted suicide was legal fifty years ago, we wouldnt have some of the advancements that control pain, nausea, breathlessness and other terminal symptoms, today. Not only that but the money which is obtained from patients that spend a lot on medicine and hospital bills would cease to exist if physician assisted-suicide was legal Some diseases that were terminal a few years ago are cured by newly developed treatments. If we accept assisted suicide now, we might delay the discovery of effective treatments for those diseases that are now terminal. What about the already corrupt society of America? Todays citizens mi ght not be as honorable as one might wish when it comes to collecting on insurance policies and wills. With assisted suicide legalized, how would one regard the suspicious death of a terminally ill individual within the family? Physician-assisted suicide is a term often used to describe the provisions of the ODDA (Oregons Death with Dignity Act) although actions taken within the law do not constitute suicide, physician assisted-suicide, or  mercy killing  or homicide. Many groups that advocate for the rights of the disabled are against the legalization of physician assisted-suicide. This is because their objection stems largely from what they see as a history of medical discrimination against the disabled particularly the disabled poor. They support a group called Not dead yet. This group is largely against physician assisted-suicide. In the article written by Ann Jackson, she explains the positive outcomes of physician assisted-suicide. In 1997 there was a repeal effort. This repeal effort was to make the ODDA( Oregons Death with Dignity Act) effective. In 1998 the act was successfully effective. This was important because this act allowed a terminally-ill resident of the state to ask his or her doctor for a prescription of life-ending medication. This was positive because it allowed terminally ill patients to end their lives without suffering for any longer. With the technology and advancements in medicine today, who is to say that a persons illness couldnt be cured within the next few months or in the near future. Why end a persons life when you never know what could be in store for them. There is always that possibility of a cure coming out before it is too late. There is always that chance. How can someone else know if another person is really experiencing  unbearable pain and suffering? Who gets to be the one to decide or to tell another that their life isnt worth living? The fact is that nobody should be able to dictate what one shall do. People should be responsible for making their own decisions, and if they no longer feel that their decision is right, they have no one else to blame but themselves. They cant blame it on their physician if they do decide that they want to take their own life. Physician assisted- suicide is a very personal decision that should be carefully thought about. Physician-assisted suicide is not taken lightly. This is a very serious medical matter. There are many rules and regulations regarding this  medical procedure. Many wavers and  consent forms  have to be signed and notarized before undergoing this medical procedure. This medical procedure is a positive procedure for most families who feel as if their loved one is suffering, or has been suffering for to long. To ensure that the patient receives full trust within the doctor there is an oath. The  Hippocratic Oath  is an oath taken by doctors which ensures that they swear to practice medicine ethically. This ensures that the physician or doctors prescribing the patient with the lethal medicine which kills them, understands what they are doing and ensures that they are doing it correctly. This oath is like a backup consent. If the doctors or physicians are not abiding by this oath they can face serious consequences which could make them loose their  medical license  and even be sentenced to face many years in jail. In source 5 written by Andrew Walter he mentions that the Hippocratic Oath protects the patients when undergoing this medical procedure, Andrew Walter is very true when stating this because it protects the patients and the patients understand what is going to happen during a normal procedure. Overall physician assisted-suicide has both its advantages and disadvantages. Some people believe that physician assisted-suicide is morally wrong and unnecessary, but on the other hand some people think it is the best thing to do and is necessary to move on in life. Either way physician assisted-suicide is a controversial issue and has caused many issues over time. Currently  physician assisted suicide  is only legal in 3 states and Hawaii is still trying to make it legal as the fourth state.

History of Israel and the Holy Land 332 B.C. to 70 A.D. Essay

The Period from 332 B. C. to 70 A. D. refers to the age of Hellenism under the rule of Alexander the Great, king of Macedonia. The period 332 B. C. marked the conquest of Judea by the Greeks, which subsequently imposed the dissemination of the Greek way of life, taxation, and economic activities designed to acquire economic gains. After the death of Alexander, his generals divided the empire and consequently fought over his empire. Judah fell under direct control of Ptolemy 1 of Egypt, but he did not seriously interfered in its religious affairs (Chapin, H. 988, Paragraph 1 Hellenism and the Roman conquest). However, after Ptolemy 1’s death, his successor was supplanted by the Seleucids of Syria, and in 175 B. C. Antiochus IV grabbed power. He then orchestrated a campaign against Judaism and in 167 B. C. he went and sacked the temple, (which was built in 520 B. C. ) of all its precious belongings. This utter desecration and gross violation of the temple motivated a successful Jewish uprising under the able leadership of Judas Maccabaeus. He then established a theocratic government, which saw the rise of the Hasmonean Dynasty under the leadership of Simon Maccabaeus who was at the same time the spiritual leader,being the High Priest, and the commander-in-chief of the military. The coming of the Romans more than half a century later saw the rise of the chief priests to power and the eventual destruction of the temple in 70 A. D. in the hands of the Romans. The Second Temple 332 B. C. to 70 A. D.  The Jewish society rose to power comparable in scope to the ancient Davidic Kingdom under Hasmonean Dynasty, although both religious and political discord is soaring between the Pharisees, who were the interpreters of the written law and the Sadducees, the aristocratic priestly class who implements strict obedience to the written law. However, with the coming of the Romans in 65 B. C. Jerusalem fell in the hands of the Romans, which ended the eighty years of independent Jewish sovereignty and heralded the period of Roman domination of Israel, which began just the same period. The Romans appointed Herod, an Idumaean, as a puppet king of Judah. His appointment as king of the Jews was subsequently confirmed by the Roman Senate in 37 B. C. He then rebuilt and magnified the platform of the temple and constructed many important buildings such as palaces, theater, citadel, hippodrome, and agora modeled after both the Hellenistic and Roman architecture. An internet article published by Planet Ware . com entitled Jerusalem, Israel cited that after Herod’s death in 4 B.  C. Jerusalem was under the care of the high priests, which was under Roman Procurators (Planet Ware, Par. 2). Chapin noted that Rome granted the Jew religious autonomy as well as some legislative and judicial rights through the Sanhedrin (Chapin, par. 5, Hellenism and the Roman Conquest). The second temple played a great role in the so-called â€Å"city of the high priest† that is, referring to the prominence of the Jewish religious leaders during this time. The Great Sanhedrin made the temple mount in Jerusalem the seat of both the religious and judicial powers vested upon them by the Roman Procurators. Their scope of authority includes religious, political, and legal authority such as trying a high priest, supervising certain rituals, and even declaring war (Chapin). This religious and judicial body was primarily composed of priestly Sadducees, which may be numbering of about seventy-one sages. The Sanhedrin’s control and judicial authority ended with the rise to power of Agrippa 1 in 41 to 44 B. C. The grand son of Herod 1 the Great, Agrippa 1 extended the city northward by constructing the third wall. However, the fanatical sect of the Jewish nationalist movement known as the zealot challenged the Roman control of Judah in A. D. 66. This uprising brought the Roman legions to a protracted siege, which was carried out by Vespasian, the Roman commander in Judah. The revolt however was crushed by his son Titus in A. D. 70 and Jerusalem and the second temple was destroyed by the Romans (Chapin) Hellenism and the Jews (Evaluations and Commendations) Hellenization, according to an internet article entitled â€Å"Celtic† and Medeterranean Interaction is the process by which non-Greeks were made more or less Greeks, assimilated into Greek culture if not acculturated. The article noted that the extent of Hellenization during the time of Alexander reach even further to the lands of the Barbarians (Celtic and Mideterranean Interaction). The article cited that Greeks abroad carried with them any thing that could help in advancing Greekness and they were more emphatically consciously Greeks and built cities and towns introducing urban structures and new ideas. Chapin pointed out that despite of the strong emphasis on priestly rule and Judaism, Jewish society was greatly influenced by the Greek Hellenism, particularly cities like Jerusalem, except in their adherence to monotheistic faith. However, life in the provinces and rural areas was comparatively unchanged (Chapin). Jerusalem subtly yet speedily adopted the Greek culture particularly the Greek language, games and sports, and even the early literature of the new faith, Christianity (Chapin, Par. ). According to an internet article entitled The Impact of Hellenism on the Jews, though Hellenism was neither offensive nor beneficial yet it poses serious challenge to Judaism (Old Testament History, Par. 1). The article noted that Hellenistic culture presents serious threats to Judaism in the same way that idolatry of the Canaanites neighbor of the Pre-Exilic Israel served as a great temptation, which had caused their nation’s destruction and later Diasporas. The impact of Hellenism on Post Exilic Israel was difficult them to resist in remaining true to their faith as Hellenism offers relief from laborious struggle for existence. Hellenism viewed life as a continuous series of social festivities, comforts, and ease. It was under Hellenistic period that public places for eating and bathing was offered to the public with customary music of strings such as the harp (O. T. History, par. 7) which today may be characterized by the restaurants and public swimming pools. Great public libraries, potential economic opportunities, and sophisticated Greek education would have strong appeal to may nobler Jews and merchants, which made the Hellenistic way of life easily acceptable. On the other hand, conservative Jews particularly Palestinian Jews were not impressed by the social and cultural advances brought about by Hellenism, courtesy of the Greeks. These conservatives despised the Hellenized Jews on the grounds that they had compromised their religion. An internet article entitled The Church History cited that the Hellenized Jews were forbidden in the temple rather they were directed to attend Greek-speaking synagogues to hear and understand the Torah being read in Greek as they could no longer speak nor understand Hebrew. The purpose therefore, of Hellenization was to assimilate every culture, or the acculturation of every nation’s culture under one culture, the Greek culture, is not only a brilliant idea or military strategy if indeed it can be categorized in that way, rather, it is highly advance idea designed to rule the world in utmost peace and economic prosperity. This impact could have changed the course of history had Alexander livelonger than he had lived. It cannot be denied that the influence of Hellenism still benefits today’s generations and the idea of hellenization still dominates the society in many ways. Interpretation Hellenism was a subtle way of conquering the world. Alexander may have conquered much of the known world during his time but his military and political leadership did not live long enough to achieve what he desired, to conquer the world. Perhaps Hellenism was intended by Alexander for a peaceful conquest. Indeed, his model Hellenistic community in Alexandria, Egypt was meant to attract the known civilizations of the benefit of Hellenization. True to his intention, the world was conquered by the Greeks not by swords and spears or by sheer military force but by festivities, by cultural and educational advancement, and by economic opportunities Hellenism offers. Today, the Greek influence still remains after thousands of years in many aspects of the social and cultural life, including arts. Hellenization can be compared to the idea of the democracy promoted by the remaining super power of the world today. By Hellenizing the known world, Alexander can build an alliance with many countries just like the idea of democracy. In other words the same concept in promoting democracy lies in the Hellenization. It symbolized the hegemonic power of Greece under the leadership of Alexander the Great. Conclusions The history of Israel from 332 B. C. up to 70 A. D. as a monument of Greece’ rise to power, and dominance of the world, at the height of their glory, as well as the marks of Israel’s resurgence to power which they so longed, under the Hasmonean dynasty, although this period marks both rise and fall of the three nations involve, its most important contribution in human civilizations was the spread of Hellenism, which truly brought not only economic benefits, but also culturally and socially, and the developments of sports. Hellenism has brought much contribution that even the generation of today is benefiting. The many borrowed words that help us understand meanings of the fast events are just one of the many benefits of Hellenization. Hellenization therefore symbolizes the hegemony of the Greek nation as well as Alexander’s desire to rule the world in peace and in prosperity as by acculturation and assimilation, it would have mean no boundaries or no enemies, rather it promotes unity and cooperation among nations. The blessings of democracy that we now enjoy may be compare to the blessings of Hellenism had Alexander livelonger.

Deloitte Case Essay

Runway offers existing customers (the â€Å"Existing Customer†) a $25 credit (the â€Å"$25 Referral Credit†) if the Existing Customer refers a friend (the â€Å"New Customer†) to Runway’s Web site and the New Customer purchases merchandise from Runway. After a purchase is made by the New Customer, the Existing Customer receives a $25 credit to be applied to a future purchase from Runway. The $25 Referral Credit represents the fair value of the cost Runway would pay to acquire a new customer from an unrelated third party or marketing firm who is not a purchaser of its products. The program is open to all of Runway’s customers and does not need to be combined with any initial or existing purchases. Required: 1. How should the $25 Referral Credit be recorded in Runway’s Income Statement — as a reduction of revenue or as a marketing expense? Explain your answer and support it using the FASB Codification. Your answer should include the Codification reference where you found the applicable guidance. 2. When would Runway record the $25 Referral Credit? What are the entries Runway would record when the $25 Referral Credit is earned by the Existing Customer? Show entries in proper journal entry form. What are the entries Runway would record when the $25 Referral Credit is redeemed against a $100 purchase made by the Existing Customer? Show entries in proper journal entry form. 3. Runway is planning to adopt IFRSs in the near future. What is the relevant accounting guidance they would follow under IFRSs? State the proper guidance and give a brief summary of it.

David Parker An Average Man - 1180 Words

Molly Wagschal Mr. Seland English 10-1 17 June 2015 All or Nothing David Parker was an average man. He was neither tall nor short. His hair, a graying brown, was an average length for a man. He was solidly middle class; he had a Honda Accord and a moderately priced house in the quiet New Jersey suburbs. Mr. Parker was frugal; he never made any frivolous purchases or bought anything without careful consideration. He had worked as an insurance agent at the same company for 30 years and planned to retire in ten years, when he was 65 years of age. He had been happily married for 32 years and had two daughters who had moved out a while before. Mr. Parker was content with his average life; he followed his daily schedule of eating a breakfast†¦show more content†¦David Parker hid his emotions, but he was deeply sad inside. One day, as Mr. Parker was eating his solitary dinner, he remembered an exchange he had had with his wife years before. His wife had suddenly wanted to drive all the way to Florida for the weekend to have a little getaway. â₠¬Å"Come on, David,† she said. â€Å"We never do anything on a whim! Everything is always so carefully planned out. Can’t we just for once do something impulsive?† Mr. Parker had replied with excuses; hotels were too expensive, Florida was too crowded at that time of the year, it would be too difficult to make arrangements with such short notice. Mary had acquiesced, but Mr. Parker could sense that she was disappointed at the lack of excitement in their lives. They planned a trip using his carefully saved vacation days for later in the year, but he knew it wasn’t the same for Mary; she wanted to do something impulsive and exciting. Mr. Parker decided to do something exciting and impulsive; his whole life he had been cautious and ordinary; now he wanted to do something extraordinary. He found an advertisement for a horse racetrack nearby, so he decided to take a trip on the weekend. He watched a few races without betting anything, but then he decided to place a small bet, two or three dollars, just for fun. The horse he bet on happened to win, and Mr. Parker laughed--he didn’t know anything about horse racing, but he coincidentally chose the winning