1. What are some similarities and differences between Quinlan and Schiavo cases?
Both cases involve a patient that has been in a prolonged vegetative state, with little to no hope of reversal. In both cases, a family member ultimately obtains guardianship over the client in order to make the decision to end any extraordinary life support measures. However, both cases require the guardian to endure a long court battle to obtain that right.
Regarding the differences between these two cases, in the Quinlan case, the father is initially denied guardianship over his daughter by the courts and must appeal their decision. However, in the Schiavo case, the husband is initially granted guardianship over his wife, but that decision is quickly appealed by his wife’s parents.
2.…show more content… Do you agree/disagree with the ethical theories/principles chosen?
The ethical principle of autonomy is appropriately applied to this case. According to Pozgar (2016), if someone is not able to exercise their autonomy, then an agent should be appointed to exercise that right on the patient’s behalf. Healthcare providers have an obligation to their patients to protect their right to autonomy. In these cases, that involves respecting the decisions made by those that are appointed to make health care decisions. In fact, not respecting an agent’s decisions is the same as not respecting a patient’s right to autonomy.
The normative ethical theory is appropriately applied to this case. It is reasonable and “normal” to expect that a member of one’s family would be appointed to make health care decisions for someone that has become capacitated. These patients are extremely vulnerable and require the watchful, caring eye of a family member to ensure they are being treated properly. This concept is not outlandish in any way, and reflects normative, non-legal behavior seen in most, if not all, cultures.
3. What other ethical theory/principle could be
