Abstract
The House Bill 534 focuses on one of the dynamic healthcare issues regarding euthanasia. It is crucial to establish the key factor that fosters prominent sustainability through the advocacy of patient’s consent. The Kentucky Death with Dignity Act offers a dynamic solution to the ethical issue posed by euthanasia concept. The author appreciates the distinction between euthanasia and the essence of individualism. In this case, the Act fosters the prominent involvement of the patient in the decision regarding the process. It is an essential framework that further renders the lack of biased interference from family members during the practice while the clause provides elaborate elements shielding the practitioners from disciplinary actions and repercussions that negatively affect career growth and practice. The possible impact of the healthcare act enshrines the articulation of distinctive roles among the relevant stakeholders during the practice.
Introduction
The Kentucky legislature intends to introduce a regulation that fosters clarity regarding patient-directed care based on death with dignity. House Bill 534 was introduced on February 17 2022 and it has recorded at least 25% in progress though it died in the committee stage (LegiScan, 2022 p. 1). The bill provides dynamic conditions for patient care among individuals facing death. Therefore, the context fosters an addition of a new section of KRS Chapter 311 that define certain terms (LegiScan, 2022). One of the approaches entails imposing the obligation to a patient proficiently ill volunteering upon the decision leading to the person’s death. In this case, the clause further establishes the conditions that a patient qualifies to make the request. Additionally, the patient can reverse the request and authorize the physician concerning the use of the medication under the spectrum of stipulated conditions for a physician’s role in informing patients and the documentation request.
Apart from the patient’s care, the clause indications the distinctive duties of the assigned medical practitioner to the patient. The dynamic engagement aspects entail the establishment of conditions requiring aspect of disposing medicine, the qualification quotient among the practitioners, the necessity of providing a report to the Health Ministry, and the involvement of private practice institutions, such as insurance agencies. (LegiScan, 2022). Ideally, the clause focuses on the prohibition of applying provisions on lethal injections, mercy killing, or active euthanasia. A qualified patient earns the right of individual engagement without interference from family members without the aspect of homicide, murder, suicide, or manslaughter. Therefore, the health bill fosters the development of Kentucky Death with Dignity Act.
Bill Progression and Sponsors
The progress of the Bill involved the introduction in the House and was later presented to the Committee on Committees (H) as a partisan clause. The aspect fosters prominent impact in the determination of the progress and engagement among the representatives. The House Bill is only sponsored by one representative Nima Kulkarni as the primary type from district HD-040. Nima attained a Bachelor of Arts (English Literature) in the University of Louisville and Masters in Business Administration in the same university. Her political experience set off in 2019 after getting elected as Representative in the Commonwealth of Kentucky House of Representatives, District 40 and featured as a candidate in the Commonwealth of Kentucky House of Representatives in 2022 (LegiScan, 2022). Nima is currently the founder and managing attorney in an Indus law firm in a professional limited liability company since 2010. Primarily, the personnel pose optimal qualifications justifying the familiarity on the implementation of legal clauses and the sustainability effect.
Bill Impact
The Kentucky Death with Dignity Act will prominently advance the concept on patient-directed care based on the distinct issues of ethical and moral dilemma. Euthanasia is a concept that involves the assisted death of a patient and usually encounters profound controversies. According to Dierickx et al. (2018), a significant percentage of sick people under palliative care chose euthanasia, explaining that their decision was satisfactory. The researchers further depict that patients without palliative care sought alternatives from euthanasia mainly because of the lack of disclosure. Therefore, palliative care is an essential factor in the determination of euthanasia among patients. In a different spectrum, the researchers provide an integrated approach towards enhancing the role of family and relatives. Although palliative care influenced the decision-making about euthanasia, the family and relatives played a vital role by influencing the patient’s autonomy. The results showed that a higher number of patients under palliative care who made the euthanasia decision were in the hospitals, with a smaller percentage from home-based care. In this case, the patient’s autonomy in deciding about euthanasia relies on palliative care and contribution by families and relatives.
There is a significant interdependence between euthanasia and ethical practice. In this case, the physician geared the end-of-life care for patients. However, the policy’s change to patient autonomy as a right rendered the one-sided view of euthanasia as either an option or the singular solution to the patient’s health problem. Kouwenhoven et al. (2019) stipulate that the essence of the term “autonomy” among patients plays a crucial role in the effectiveness of euthanasia (p. 44). Therefore, the context enhances the derivation of important information about the impact of an ill person’s decision. In America, the healthcare policy changed the regulatory framework to establish that the decision depends on the patient’s choice. According to the researchers, the change of liberty from an ideal to the concept of a right negatively affected the physician’s ability to deliver the services. Initially, the physician operated on the basis of autonomy as an ideal, hence the capacity to choose the best alternative for the sick individual.
The independence aspect from the patient is an important element when practicing euthanasia. Pesapane et al. (2018) argues that a patient’s consent is vital mainly because it affirms the essence of acknowledgement among all entities. Therefore, the context enhances the derivation of important information about the impact of an ill person’s decision. The incorporation of the Kentucky Death with Dignity Act profoundly affects the controversy concerning patient’s consent. One of the significant features in the clause involves the lack of involvement of the family and relatives. Therefore, the patient independently volunteers for the medical procedure. Further, the regulation provides distinct roles for the practitioner and other stakeholders’ engagement level. It is the mandate of the healthcare professionals to ensure the protection and the retention of patient’s dignity. As a result, the clause empowers the practitioners with the capacity to engage and restrict participation of involved parties in the patient’s volunteerism in the task. The aspect plays a profound role in the alleviation of dynamic controversies on homicide, suicide, and murder instances.
The interdependence between nursing practice and euthanasia’s ethical issues highly affects the continuum of care. In this case, the researchers focus on nurses’ interpretation of mercy killing and its significance to patient treatment (Pesut et al., 2020). On the one hand, assisted death provides a solution to the pain and agony of an ill person. On the other hand, nurses lack clarity on the basis of its effectiveness and relevance despite a sick person’s autonomy being a right in some countries. According to the researchers, the change of autonomy from an ideal to the concept of a right negatively affected the physician’s ability to deliver the services. Initially, the medical practitioner operated on the basis of self-reliance as an ideal solution, hence the ability to choose the best alternative for the patient. This article provides an insight into the operability of an individual’s sovereignty and the nurses’ justification. Therefore, it is paramount that researchers further explore the rationale for autonomy and the essence of the care policy to protect life.
The Kentucky Death with Dignity Act offers a dynamic solution to the ethical issue posed by euthanasia concept. The author appreciates the distinction between euthanasia and the essence of individualism. In this case, the Act fosters the prominent involvement of the patient in the decision regarding the process. It is an essential framework that further renders the lack of biased interference from family members during the practice while the clause provides elaborate elements shielding the practitioners from disciplinary actions and repercussions that negatively affect career growth and practice. The possible impact of the healthcare act enshrines the articulation of distinctive roles among the relevant stakeholders during the practice. On the one hand, the patient attains the freedom to make a decision without influence and interference hence justifying the concept of consent. On the other hand, the medical practitioners aptly engage in the duties based on the stipulation of the legal clause without ethical and moral dilemma under the spectrum of nursing professionalism.
Conclusion
The Kentucky Death with Dignity Act focuses on the alleviation of the conceptual aspect of euthanasia practice among patients. The House Bill 534, sponsored by representative Nima Kulkarni, focuses on the aspect of enhancing independence among patients with terminal illnesses to provide consent for assisted death. The current location in the legislative system is the committee on Committees (H). The medical practitioner assists the patient in the process based on the informed consent without the interference from the patient’s family and relatives. A nurse’s responsibility is to protect and improve the living quotient among patients. However, the clause focuses on the essence of distinguishing the roles of the dynamic entities to alleviate the ethical and moral dilemma based on the decisions that follow the process. The justification of the process to the insurance agencies and the legal authorities while protecting the practitioner’s career reputation is a demonstration concerning the commitment. Therefore, the clause is a necessity that involves intersectionality of distinctive roles and engagements with minimal biased control regarding healthcare service provision. The optimal role of the clause is a sustainable aspect in the advocacy for optimal well-being among people and within the healthcare sector.
References
Dierickx, S., Deliens, L., Cohen, J., & Chambaere, K. (2018). Involvement of palliative care in euthanasia practice in a context of legalized euthanasia: A population-based mortality follow-back study. Palliative Medicine, 32(1), 114-122.
Kouwenhoven, P. S., Van Thiel, G. J., van der Heide, A., Rietjens, J. A., & van Delden, J. J. (2019). Developments in euthanasia practice in the Netherlands: Balancing professional responsibility and the patient’s autonomy. European Journal of General Practice, 25(1), 44-48.
LegiScan. (2022). Kentucky HB534 | 2022 | Regular Session. LegiScan.
Pesapane, F., Volonté, C., Codari, M., & Sardanelli, F. (2018). Artificial intelligence as a medical device in radiology: Ethical and regulatory issues in Europe and the United States. Insights into Imaging, 9(5).
Pesut, B., Greig, M., Thorne, S., Storch, J., Burgess, M., Tishelman, C.,… & Janke, R. (2020). Nursing and euthanasia: A narrative review of the nursing ethics literature. Nursing ethics, 27(1), 152-167.