Advances In Medical Technology Essays - Euthanasia,

Advances In Medical Technology Advances in medical technology have done a great deal to produce miraculous cures and recoveries. In some circumstances however, these advances have created problems for the elderly. More aggressive technology approaches are used to extend the life of the elderly. On the whole the elderly, as well as others, welcome that development -- even if they fear some of its consequences. With these advances it has become possible to keep people in a vegetative state for almost unlimited periods of time. Moreover, there are situations in which neither the patient nor the family has the ability to bring such unhappy circumstances to an end. For this reason, advance directives are becoming increasingly prevalent. Advance directives are like living wills. They are documents that a person can complete to ensure that health care choices are respected. An advance directive only comes into play if a person cannot communicate wishes because the person is permanently unconscious or mentally incapacitated. A 1991 law called The Patient Self Determination Act (PSDA) requires hospitals and nursing homes to tell patients about their right to refuse medical treatment. People can put anything in their advance directives. Some people list every medical intervention they do not want, while others want to make clear their request for heroic measures at any cost. It is a way to spell out personal wishes. Advance directives are seen as a way to protect one's legal rights for refusal of treatment. But are advance directives effective in achieving the aim intended? There is evidence both on the Internet, in case study books and magazines to indicate that advance directives alone fall far short of their objective. In very few cases did advance directives have any influence over decisions to withdraw or withhold life prolonging treatment. The statistics in recent studies demand our attention and make us focus on the tension and disagreement that exists between physicians and their patients. The population clearly seeks more control over both their future medical care and also the method, timing, and place of their death. Yet, if one were to really study the publicized statistics, he or she would find that physicians often do not allow patient control. How disheartening for a patient to fear that the doctor cannot be trusted in a matter of such importance. It appears that many doctors, nurses, especially manor care takers, have no respect for their patients' wishes. Nurses as patient advocates have a responsibility to make sure patients' wishes are respected; it is nursing's role to raise informed questions and even objections if a patient's treatment violates the patient's wishes. Without strenuous interventions to improve the situation, a vast effort will be put forth to establish something that basically doesn't work. Evaluations of the reasons for the failure to implement a patient's advance directive would show quite a dramatic grab of attention. When families contradict the patients wishes, physicians take their views under consideration giving them immense weight. After all, who does the physician have to answer to? The living, of course. This is why when the family disagrees with the advance directive, the family's decisions usually win out. Dealing with death and suffering on a daily basis does not make it easy for medical professionals to make decisions about removing life support. Most make an effort to be as dispassionate as possible about such situations so that families can make informed decisions. Another factor for the failure to follow an advance directive was the treating physician's refusal. One reason for the physician's refusal may be reluctance to acknowledge increasing patient autonomy. After all, the medical decision horizon looks substantially different today than it did just a few years ago. Interpreting advance directives can be problematic at times, as when information is lacking, or when a strict reading of the document does not seem to make sense. For example, the advance directive may suggest one course of care, while the physician and/or family believe the patient would in fact have wanted something else. No advance directive can anticipate every situation that could possibly arise. Emergency circumstances can be another barrier to the implementation of advance directives. The emergency room physician treating an accident victim is not really in a

Achieved Status Versus Ascribed Status in Sociology

Achieved Status Versus Ascribed Status in Sociology Status is a term that is used often in sociology. Broadly speaking, there are two kinds of status, achieved status and ascribed status. Each can refer to ones position, or role, within a social system- child, parent, pupil, playmate, etc.- or to ones economic or social position within that status.   Individuals usually hold multiple statuses at any given time- lawyers, say, who happen to devote most of their time to pro bono work instead of rising through the ranks at a prestigious law firm. Status is important sociologically because we attach to ones position a certain set of  presumed  rights, as well as presumed obligations and expectations for certain behaviors. Achieved Status An achieved status is one that is acquired on the basis of merit; it is a position that is earned or chosen and reflects a persons skills, abilities, and efforts. Being a professional athlete, for example, is an achieved status, as is being a lawyer, college professor, or even a criminal. Ascribed Status An ascribed status, on the other hand, is beyond an individuals control. It is not earned, but rather is something people are either born with or had no control over. Examples of ascribed status include sex, race, and age. Children usually have more ascribed statuses than adults, since they do not usually have a choice in most matters. A familys social status or socioeconomic status, for instance, would be an achieved status for adults, but an ascribed status for children. Homelessness might also be another example. For adults, homelessness often comes by way of achieving, or rather not achieving, something. For children, however, homelessness is not something they have any control over. Their economic status, or lack thereof, is entirely dependent on their parents actions. Mixed-Status The line between achieved status and ascribed status is not always black and white. There are many statuses that can be considered a mixture of achievement and ascription. Parenthood, for one. According to the latest numbers gathered by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), nearly 50 percent of pregnancies in the U.S. are unplanned, which makes parenthood for those people an ascribed status. Then there are people who achieve a certain status because of an ascribed status. Take Kim Kardashian, for example, probably the most famous  reality television celebrity in the world. Many people might argue that she would never have achieved that status if she had not come from a wealthy family, which is her ascribed status.  Ã‚   Status Obligations Probably the greatest set of obligations are conferred upon the status of parenthood.  First, there are biological obligations: Mothers are expected to care for themselves and their unborn child (or children, in the case of twins, etc.) by abstaining for any activity that could cause either of them harm. Once a child is born, a host of legal, social, and economic obligations kick in, all with the purpose of ensuring that parents act in a responsible manner toward their children. Then there are professional status obligations, like doctors and lawyers whose vocations bind them to certain oaths governing their client relationships. And socioeconomic status obligates those who have achieved a certain high level of economic status to contribute portions of their wealth to help the less fortunate in society.