Table of contentsThe ethical dilemmas in the case of Terri SchiavoAutonomy versus best interestsBenefit versus non-maleficenceQuality of lifeEthical principles of end-of-life careAutonomyBenefitNon-maleficenceLegal and medical perspectivesLegal PerspectivesMedical perspectivesInfluence on death and dyingValue of human lifeConclusionThe case of Terri Schiavo, a woman who spent 15 years in a persistent vegetative state, sparked a profound ethical debate around end-of-life care and the right to die with dignity . This essay aims to analyze the ethical dilemmas surrounding the case of Terri Schiavo, to explore how ethical principles such as autonomy, beneficence and non-maleficence can guide decision-making in end-of-life care, to delve deeper into the legal and medical perspectives involved and discuss the broader influence of this case on the landscape of death and dying, as well as the value of human life. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”?Get the original essayThe Ethical Dilemmas of Terri Schiavo's CaseThe case of Terri Schiavo was fraught with ethical difficulties. Terri fell into a persistent vegetative state in 1990, and the legal and ethical battles that followed lasted more than a decade. The main ethical dilemmas included: Autonomy versus best interests. Terri left no written instructions regarding her end-of-life wishes. Her husband, Michael Schiavo, claimed she verbally expressed her desire not to be kept alive in a vegetative state. Terri's parents, on the other hand, thought she would want to stay alive. This raises the fundamental ethical question of whether a person's autonomy (the right to make decisions about their own body) should take precedence over what others perceive to be in their best interests. Beneficence or non-maleficenceThe principle of beneficence, which calls for doing what is in the patient's best interest, clashes with non-maleficence, the principle of doing no harm. Terri's continued life-sustaining treatment, including artificial nutrition and hydration, was seen by her parents as a way to protect her life. However, Michael argued that this was not in her best interest, given her irreversible condition and her alleged wishes. This posed an ethical dilemma as to whether extending one's life constituted a benefit or harm. Quality of life Terri's quality of life was a central concern. She had no consciousness and her state of health was considered irreversible. Her husband argued that maintaining her life support was undignified and contrary to her alleged wishes for a better quality of life. Conversely, his parents asserted that every life, regardless of its quality, had intrinsic value, leading to a deep ethical debate about the inherent value of human life. Ethical Principles of End-of-Life Care Several ethical principles can guide navigation of the complexities. end-of-life care, including autonomy, beneficence and non-maleficence.AutonomyThe principle of autonomy highlights the importance of respecting an individual's right to make decisions about their own life and death. In cases like Terri Schiavo's, where the patient's wishes are unclear, the principle of substituted judgment may be applied. This involves making decisions based on what the patient would likely have chosen, given their values ​​and beliefs. Beneficence Beneficence guides health care providers to act in the best interest of the patient. In the.