NURSING ASSIGNMENT: Ratnakumar's Argument on Palliative Care

This nursing assignment critically analyzes S. Ratnakumar's argument concerning palliative care and euthanasia, focusing on the care of terminally ill patients. Ratnakumar's argument centers on the idea that both palliative care and euthanasia serve the purpose of providing patient dignity, albeit through different approaches. The assignment explores Ratnakumar's viewpoint, which highlights the struggles of patients facing untreatable illnesses and unbearable pain. The author provides their own assertions, agreeing with the importance of patient dignity but disagreeing with the general application of euthanasia, supporting palliative care instead. The strengths of Ratnakumar’s argument include the emphasis on dignity, while its weaknesses involve a lack of consideration for patients with disabilities. The conclusion reinforces the importance of dignity in end-of-life care while cautioning against a generalized approach to euthanasia and palliative care. The assignment uses several references to support the arguments and claims.

Running head: NURSING ASSIGNMENT
S RATNAKUMAR’S ARGUMENT ABOUT PALLIATIVE CARE AND EUTHANASIA
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author note

1NURSING ASSIGNMENT
Introduction
Patient dignity is a universal need which is involved in the care service throughout the
world and requires the healthcare professionals to include this in the multidimensional concept of
care service (Vehling & Mehnert, 2014). In terminally ill patients, dignity becomes the highest
priority as Juliao et al. (2014) mentioned that majority of the terminally ill patient prefer to die
with dignity. This was the primary thesis of S. Ratnakumar, when he mentioned that palliative
care or euthanasia both serves the same purpose, of providing the patient with dignity, however,
uses two different approaches. This section will discuss about the idea provided by S.
Ratnakumar and then will be argued by assertions. Further the strengths and weaknesses of the
ideas provided by S. Ratnakumar will be discussed.
Argument by S. Ratnakumar
Argument provided by S. Ratnakumar was based on the struggles faced by a terminally
ill patient with untreatable illness and unbearable pain within the healthcare facilities. He
mentioned that without euthanasia or palliative care in such situation, patients are not provided
with sedations so that they could lead to a ‘good end’ of their life. He mentioned instances of
dehydration, lack of will, inability to consume food, severe pain and others which could be
decreased by providing such terminally ill patients with palliative care or euthanasia. Further, he
also mentioned the example of Belgium, where palliative care is provided with integrated
euthanasia to the patients with untreatable diseases and hence, mentioned about patient integrity
and dignity. Further, his argument completely supported the application of palliative care and
euthanasia in spite of palliative care or euthanasia as he preferred these two approaches for

2NURSING ASSIGNMENT
providing the terminally ill patients with quality life at the end and hence, supported the
application of these in care services.
Own assertions about the ideas
Patient dignity and integrity is important to comply with and as per Radbruch et al.
(2016) euthanasia and palliative care are care processes that stops all the interventions and
provide the patient with sedations so that they can end their life with comfort and dignity.
However, as per Banović and Turanjanin (2014), medical interventions should be applied to
provide patients to improve their health condition, and not to end their life. As per Radbruch et
al. (2016), euthanasia should not be legalized around the world because there is a probability that
it would increase the euthanasia associated tourism and hence, the ethical right of autonomy
would be misused. On the other hand, palliative care is the care process in which compassionate
and creative healthcare could develop a way using which it becomes easier to comfort the patient
by decreasing their pain and associated complications (De Lima et al., 2017). Hence, I would
support the application of palliative care in the care process instead of euthanasia as it violates
the medical ethics of supportive=ng and improving patient condition in adverse health
conditions.
In the argument provided by S Ratnakumar, I would disagree with the concept of
palliative care and euthanasia as there are several patients who are disabled and are unable to live
their life on their own and perform the activities of daily life (Gamondi et al., 2014). Therefore,
allowing terminally ill patients with assisted euthanasia and palliative care could increase the
chances of such disables and elderly people to utilize such medical approach to end their life.
Hence, this approach could not be generally applied in society as it would be harmful for

3NURSING ASSIGNMENT
humanity (Kim, De Vries & Peteet, 2016). Besides these, it was seen through researches that on
application of palliative care, majority of patients become hopeful to their life and providing
them, with euthanasia could violate their fundamental rights (Radbruch et al., 2016). Further
both these, aspects violates the duty of care associated right of the healthcare professional and
hence, these care approaches should not be applied to general healthcare approach. However, I
agree to the dignity of care associated argument as it provides the patient with comfortable and
peaceful end of life (Banović & Turanjanin, 2014).
Strengths and weaknesses of Ratnakumar’s argument
Idea of dignity and integrity was the strength of Ratnakumar’s argument regarding
palliative care and euthanasia. Dietary lacks, inability to communicate with loved ones and harsh
medical interventions could affect their dignity and hence, palliative care or euthanasia provide
them with comfortable and quality end of life (Juliao et al., 2014). Further, this concept provided
the patient with effective and dignified death and hence, could be determined as a compassionate
option compared to the medical interventions.
However, while discussing the concepts, Ratnakumar only focused on the mental and
physical complications in untreatable diseases, but did not discussed about the struggles of
patients with mental or physical disabilities, but are enthusiastic about their life and willing to
life it with complete compassion (Gamondi et al., 2014). Hence, depending on the perspective of
the negative aspects of healthcare process, generalizing euthanasia or palliative care would be
partiality towards the purpose of medical interventions. Hence, Ratnakumar should include an
overall aspect of complications faced by terminally ill patients or the disabled community so that

4NURSING ASSIGNMENT
while providing them with palliative care or euthanasia, no such controversy could arise
(Banović & Turanjanin, 2014).
Conclusion
This section discussed about the argument provided by S Ratnakumar about palliative
care and euthanasia and its application in the care process for the terminally ill patients to
maintain their integrity and dignity. In this aspect, his argument regarding, application of
palliative care and euthanasia for terminally ill patients were provided. With respect to that my
ideation about the aspects with agreement to his concept if dignity and disagreement to his
partial observation was provided. hence, a comprehensive discussion about these topics were
mentioned within this paper.

5NURSING ASSIGNMENT
References
Banović, B., & Turanjanin, V. (2014). Euthanasia: murder or not: a comparative
approach. Iranian journal of public health, 43(10), 1316.
De Lima, L., Woodruff, R., Pettus, K., Downing, J., Buitrago, R., Munyoro, E., ... & Radbruch,
L. (2017). International association for hospice and palliative care position statement:
euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. Journal of palliative medicine, 20(1), 8-14.
Gamondi, C., Borasio, G. D., Limoni, C., Preston, N., & Payne, S. (2014). Legalisation of
assisted suicide: a safeguard to euthanasia. Lancet, 384(127), 61154-5.
Juliao, M., Oliveira, F., Nunes, B., Vaz Carneiro, A., & Barbosa, A. (2014). Efficacy of dignity
therapy on depression and anxiety in Portuguese terminally ill patients: a phase II
randomized controlled trial. Journal of Palliative Medicine, 17(6), 688-695.
Kim, S. Y., De Vries, R. G., & Peteet, J. R. (2016). Euthanasia and assisted suicide of patients
with psychiatric disorders in the Netherlands 2011 to 2014. JAMA psychiatry, 73(4), 362-
368.
Radbruch, L., Leget, C., Bahr, P., Müller-Busch, C., Ellershaw, J., De Conno, F., ... & board
members of the EAPC. (2016). Euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide: a white paper
from the European Association for Palliative Care. Palliative medicine, 30(2), 104-116.
Radbruch, L., Leget, C., Bahr, P., Müller-Busch, C., Ellershaw, J., De Conno, F., ... & board
members of the EAPC. (2016). Euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide: a white paper
from the European Association for Palliative Care. Palliative medicine, 30(2), 104-116.
Vehling, S., & Mehnert, A. (2014). Symptom burden, loss of dignity, and demoralization in
patients with cancer: a mediation model. Psycho
‐Oncology, 23(3), 283-290.