One of the redeeming factors of the United States welfare state ...

[Mr.Thesaxman]

One of the redeeming factors of the United States welfare state is that it has made higher education widely available through community colleges and four-year colleges.
 
  Indicate whether the statement is true or false

Question 2

Discuss the controversy over the use of life-sustaining equipment.
 
  What will be an ideal response?

[tennis14576]

Answer to Question 1

True

Answer to Question 2

Medical technology has made dramatic advances in this century. Today, it is possible to keep alive for months, and in many cases years, people who in the past would have died. Even after a person's brain has stopped functioning, technology can keep the respiratory processes, the heart, the liver, and other vital organs functioning for months. The lives of those who are terminally ill can be prolonged for substantial periods of time, but they may experience considerable pain and will be in a deteriorated condition. Many controversial issues have arisen about the use of life-sustaining technology. How should death now be defined, as vital functions can be kept going even when the brain is dead? Some lawsuits have already been filed in organ donor cases in which organs allegedly were removed before the donor was deceased. Should the lives of the terminally ill be prolonged when there is practically no hope for recovery and the patients are in severe pain? Should society seek to keep alive people who have such a severe and profound cognitive disability that they cannot (and will never be able to) walk or sit up? Should abortion be mandatory if major genetic defects are detected in the fetus? When should life-prolonging efforts be used, and when should the patient be allowed to die? If terminally ill people who are in severe pain want to end their life by suicide, should they be legally allowed to-and should others (such as physicians and close relatives) be legally allowed to assist in such suicides? Because of the adverse consequences of being kept alive indefinitely when there is no hope of recovery, an increasing number of people are signing living wills. In a living will, a person stipulates in writing that, if he or she becomes physically or mentally disabled from a life-threatening illness from which there is no reasonable expectation of recovery, she or he wants to be allowed to die and not be kept alive by artificial means. A living will is not binding, but it conveys a patient's wishes to those (such as relatives and attending physicians) who must make a decision about whether to use life-sustaining equipment. To complement living wills, a number of states have enacted legislation enabling adults to authorize (by filling out a Power of Attorney for Health Care form) other individuals (called health-care agents) to make health-care decisions on their behalf if they become incapacitated. The President's Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Biomedical and Behavioral Research recommended in 1981 that all states define death as occurring when either of the following is judged to have taken place: (a) the irreversible cessation of circulatory and respiratory functions (this is essentially the definition used in the past) or (b) irreversible cessation of all functions of the entire brain, including the brainstem (this is a new definition). In adopting the whole-brain concept, the commission rejected a more controversial argument that death should be deemed to occur when higher-brain functions (those controlling consciousness, thought, and emotions) are lost. Patients who have lost higher-brain functions but retain the brainstem functions can persist for years in a chronic vegetative state. Many states have now incorporated this definition of death into their statutes.