Panicola's Catholic Teaching on care for the dying (by 8 Feb)
Feel free to comment on the reading I sent on 1 Feb regarding Catholic teaching about care for the dying (what's obligatory, what's not, Principle of Double-Effect, etc.).
My favorite part of this article is when Panicola lists the summary of the Catholic view. In the summary he emphasizes patient autonomy in point three by saying, "One should be able to make medical-moral decisions for oneself." I like this emphasis because the Catholic church is known for being 'too strict' on many issues. This clearly turns the tables and puts the responsibility in the hands of the patient. Of course there are 'rules' that must be followed by the patient while making the decision, but it makes it a decision rather than a mandate. This directly ties to the principle of burden and benefit. The Church teaches it is never beneficial for the patient or doctor to take active measures resulting in death. However, it also teaches that the burden is labeled excessive one a case to case basis. This essentially allows for complete control over what medical treatment is accepted by the patient. This freedom is what makes the Catholic position so universal. There is no discrimination or guidelines that force treatment on patients, but an acceptance of the judgment of the patient or proxy.
I thought this article was very good to read. That's because it is dealing directly with the profession that I will be going into and things that I will have to deal in one way or another in the nursing profession. Particularly, I liked the Catholic View section of the article. That is because also being a Catholic I do agree with those points that Panicola brings up in the article.
With Nicole on this one- I like that it seems more "guideline"-y than mandates or rules, meaning this is what you ultimately SHOULD do in this situation, but it acknowledges that there are extreme cases and it is ultimately up to the patient or the proxy. I also liked how they distinguished between ordinary and extraordinary means and how those terms are somewhat flexible on a case-by-case basis. It is hard for me the read the Church's view or mandate on any issues outside of religion, especially science and medicine, because they are two completely different spheres of knowledge that require fundamentally separate ways of thinking. It makes me want to say "this isn't your place," but the Church has an opinion on everything, and I guess it is important to at least know and understand that views presented by it.
I agree with Megan, this article was very informative of the view the catholic church teaches about prolonging life. I will be facing this topic throughout my career as a nurse. The best portion of the article would have been the six moral norms that came from centuries of Catholic teaching. Though it is easier said and done, until we are faced with this situation. Though being a Catholic myself there are alot of points to this article that I do agree with.
I agree one hundred percent with Sarah on this one, and I think that there are cases in which science and religion can agree. There is a limit to what is right medically and what is excessive, and the fine line between the two is dependant on the views of the patient. It is subjective, and it should stay that way.
I enjoyed this article and have seen and will continue to see these views in the hospital setting. I think Science and Religion can not function without the other. Each patient is different and health care team members have an obligation to that patient to respect their wishes.
I enjoyed this article because I am going into nursing and health care and will be faced with many times. Like many others, I have also been raised Catholic so it was very interesting to learn about all of the beliefs regarding prolonging life. It is important to realize that all patients have different back grounds and beliefs and as health care workers we must respect all patients and set aside own biases.
My favorite part of this article is when Panicola lists the summary of the Catholic view. In the summary he emphasizes patient autonomy in point three by saying, "One should be able to make medical-moral decisions for oneself." I like this emphasis because the Catholic church is known for being 'too strict' on many issues. This clearly turns the tables and puts the responsibility in the hands of the patient. Of course there are 'rules' that must be followed by the patient while making the decision, but it makes it a decision rather than a mandate. This directly ties to the principle of burden and benefit. The Church teaches it is never beneficial for the patient or doctor to take active measures resulting in death. However, it also teaches that the burden is labeled excessive one a case to case basis. This essentially allows for complete control over what medical treatment is accepted by the patient. This freedom is what makes the Catholic position so universal. There is no discrimination or guidelines that force treatment on patients, but an acceptance of the judgment of the patient or proxy.
ReplyDeleteI thought this article was very good to read. That's because it is dealing directly with the profession that I will be going into and things that I will have to deal in one way or another in the nursing profession. Particularly, I liked the Catholic View section of the article. That is because also being a Catholic I do agree with those points that Panicola brings up in the article.
ReplyDeleteWith Nicole on this one- I like that it seems more "guideline"-y than mandates or rules, meaning this is what you ultimately SHOULD do in this situation, but it acknowledges that there are extreme cases and it is ultimately up to the patient or the proxy. I also liked how they distinguished between ordinary and extraordinary means and how those terms are somewhat flexible on a case-by-case basis.
ReplyDeleteIt is hard for me the read the Church's view or mandate on any issues outside of religion, especially science and medicine, because they are two completely different spheres of knowledge that require fundamentally separate ways of thinking. It makes me want to say "this isn't your place," but the Church has an opinion on everything, and I guess it is important to at least know and understand that views presented by it.
I agree with Megan, this article was very informative of the view the catholic church teaches about prolonging life. I will be facing this topic throughout my career as a nurse. The best portion of the article would have been the six moral norms that came from centuries of Catholic teaching. Though it is easier said and done, until we are faced with this situation. Though being a Catholic myself there are alot of points to this article that I do agree with.
ReplyDeleteI agree one hundred percent with Sarah on this one, and I think that there are cases in which science and religion can agree. There is a limit to what is right medically and what is excessive, and the fine line between the two is dependant on the views of the patient. It is subjective, and it should stay that way.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed this article and have seen and will continue to see these views in the hospital setting. I think Science and Religion can not function without the other. Each patient is different and health care team members have an obligation to that patient to respect their wishes.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed this article because I am going into nursing and health care and will be faced with many times. Like many others, I have also been raised Catholic so it was very interesting to learn about all of the beliefs regarding prolonging life. It is important to realize that all patients have different back grounds and beliefs and as health care workers we must respect all patients and set aside own biases.
ReplyDelete