Deck 50: The Intentional Termination Fo Life Bonnie Steinbock

Question 1

Steinbock argues that the point of a patient's right to refuse treatment is

A) left for each patient to decide for herself.
B) to protect their doctor from negative legal repercussions.
C) to protect them from unwanted interference from others.
D) to facilitate their right to die.

Answer 1

C

Question 2

Steinbock contrasts euthanasia with

A) the intentional termination of life.
B) cessation of extraordinary means of treatment.
C) mercy killing.
D) homicide.

Answer 2

B

Question 3

Steinbock mentions two situations in which she considers the cessation of life-prolonging medical treatment justifiable. One of these is when a

A) patient refuses treatment.
B) baby has a deformity.
C) patient is near death.
D) patient wishes to end his or her life.

Answer 3

A

Question 4

One situation in which Steinbock believes it is justifiable to cease life-prolonging medical treatment is

A) when parents wish to withhold treatment from a disabled infant.
B) when a patient wishes to end his life.
C) when a patient's family thinks it is for the best.
D) when continued treatment would lead to greater discomfort without improving the patient's condition.

Question 5

Why does Steinbock think that withholding life-prolonging treatment is morally acceptable when euthanasia is not?

A) Because the doctor is being passive, not acting
B) Because the patient is involved in the decision
C) Because the patient will suffer less
D) Because the doctor is not intentionally terminating the patient's life

Question 6

What is Steinbock's definition of extraordinary care?

A) Providing extraordinary care puts the doctor in question in legal jeopardy.
B) While ordinary care is what a doctor would normally be expected to provide, extraordinary care has little hope of benefitting the patient.
C) Extraordinary care is care that it is unreasonable to expect any doctor to provide.
D) Care is "extraordinary" when it involves specialized expertise few doctors possess.

Question 7

Steinbock claims that patients may rightfully

A) demand life-ending treatment.
B) refuse life-preserving treatment only with adequate reason.
C) refuse life-preserving treatment even without adequate reason.
D) None of the above

Question 8

Which of the following best reflects Steinbock's interpretation of the American Medical Association's (AMA) statement on euthanasia?

A) The AMA forbids all euthanasia but may allow doctors to stop using extraordinary means to prolong life.
B) The AMA forbids active euthanasia but may allow either passive euthanasia or the cessation of extraordinary means to prolong life.
C) The AMA forbids all euthanasia and also does not allow the cessation of extraordinary means to prolong life.
D) The AMA discourages euthanasia but may allow it, according to the judgment of the patient, patient's family, and the physician.

Question 9

What is Steinbock's opinion of the case in which the infant with Down syndrome was allowed to die through passive euthanasia?

A) Doctors merely withheld treatment so it was morally acceptable.
B) The baby suffered, and it would have been better to end its life quickly.
C) Intentionally allowing the baby to die was wrong, whether it was quick or slow.
D) None of the above

Question 10

According to Steinbock, the American Medical Association

A) invokes the distinction between intending and foreseeing.
B) invokes the distinction between ordinary and extraordinary care.
C) invokes the distinction between popular opinion and medical fact.
D) Both a and b

Question 11

Steinbock believes that Rachels misinterpreted the American Medical Association's statement on euthanasia.

Question 12

According to Steinbock, the reason a doctor does not commit homicide when she terminates extraordinary life-prolonging treatment is that she has, morally speaking, done nothing at all.

Question 13

Steinbock believes that in a few situations, it is acceptable for a doctor to terminate a patient's life intentionally.

Question 14

Steinbock claims that doctors treating infants may only proceed with the consent of the parents.

Question 15

A treatment that counts as ordinary care in one situation may count as extraordinary care in another.

Question 16

According to Steinbock, a doctor that ceases using extraordinary means to keep a patient alive must intend for that patient to die.

Question 17

Steinbock believes that a quick death is always preferable to a lingering one.

Question 18

Steinbock believes that the American Medical Association forbids all euthanasia, whether active or passive.

Question 19

According to Steinbock, a doctor may cease treatment when treatment will create discomfort without improving the patient's condition.

Question 20

Steinbock explains the importance of the ordinary/extraordinary care distinction in terms of its connection to the doctor's intention.

Question 21

Explain the difference between "passive euthanasia" and "cessation of life-prolonging treatment" according to Steinbock and then give an example of each. Steinbock thinks there is an important moral difference between the two. Is she right?

Question 22

How should a doctor decide what is "ordinary treatment" and what is "extraordinary"? Withholding ordinary treatment is negligent but withholding extraordinary treatment can be a humane choice. Write a brief example story in which a doctor is faced with making this decision.

Question 23

Write a dialog between Rachels and Steinbock about the baby with Down syndrome and the intestinal obstruction. The parents want to do nothing and allow "passive euthanasia." What would Rachels say? What would Steinbock say? How would Rachels respond?

Question 24

Steinbock argues that Rachels misunderstands the American Medical Association's position. What mistake does Steinbock claim Rachels makes? Explain the distinction on which Rachels focuses and the distinction Steinbock offers instead. Evaluate Steinbock's position. Is her interpretation more plausible? Why or why not?