Introduction
Medical practitioners, their patients, and their patients’ families may face severe ethical dilemmas as a result of the use of medical technology. A feeding tube, for instance, is required to sustain a persistent vegetative state. It is not a highly advanced piece of medical technology, but in some cases, it can assist in supporting organic processes indefinitely.
Discussion
The ethical dispute over the use of current medical technology, for this reason, revolves around whether or not maintaining these physical functions is the same as sustaining life. When I consider how much it is worth to keep an 86-year-old woman alive, a 10-year-old kid, or my grandmother in a vegetative condition, my first instinct is to save my grandmother, then a child, and finally, an 86-year-old woman if resources allow. Without a doubt, such criteria as lottery, the ability to pay, or merit should not be used to determine who gets limited medical resources. I think that each patient’s situation should be evaluated based on their diagnoses, likelihood of regaining consciousness, and relatives’ requirements, according to my moral principles.
I believe there is no need to use medical technology if the patient’s condition is too severe to react to treatment, such as attempting a prolonged treatment for metastatic cancer. Another argument is that the quality of life following treatment is unsatisfactory or does not last long enough to justify the intervention. Many of today’s medical technological improvements have increased life expectancy and reduced discomfort but have done little to address the underlying causes of illnesses.
Conclusion
Instead of providing benefits, the advancement of new medical technology will require people to make more complex decisions about how to apply them. Aside from financial issues, current and developing medical technology will exacerbate existing ethical quandaries while producing new ones.