€™s Constitutional Court makes it clear that the practices are justified only “under certain circumstances for people suffering terminal illness when the person awaiting death gives their consent” (Colombia, 1997, 1). In Holland physicians are permitted by law to provide lethal medications or lethal injections, but only under strict protocol. The Oregon law in the U.S. has been unsuccessfully fought by anti-freedom-of-choice religious groups. Even though the Roman Catholic Church spent millions getting the measure back on the ballot for a second vote, Oregon voters overwhelmingly supported it. In 2000, 27 individuals in Oregon adopted their right to use the law (Peleger, 2001, A1). In Canada euthanasia is illegal. The Netherlands recently legalized the practice but physicians must “observe a strict number of conditions” (Fletcher, 2000, 01). In Japan it is permitted only under special circumstances. Countries like Mexico, Italy and South Africa view euthanasia as they do murder. The same is true for Britain where it is treated as homicide, even though supports have tried to change the law for years. In Australian after legalizing euthanasia, the Senate recently voted 38 to 34 to “terminate the world’s first system of legalized euthanasia just six month after the first person died under the law” (Australia, 1997, 1). With people living longer and medical technology available to help them do so, euthanasia continues to be an important and complex global issue.
APPLICATION OF ETHICAL MODEL/PRINCIPLE
According to Burkhardt (et al, 1998), “moral action is the historical basis for the genesis, evolution, and practice of nursing” (3). There is a huge difference between having a set of principles and acting on them. Despite euthanasia being legal in many places albeit under strict circumstances and provisions, there are a host of moral, ethical, and religious issues that pertain to the practice of Euthanasia...