Question

landmark historical cases: a competent adult refuses a feeding tube, even though it will result in death. which case most directly supports this right?

○ cruzan v. missouri
○ cobbs v. grant
○ bouvia v. superior court
○ saikewicz

ripped from the headlines: the news coverage of dignitas and founder ludwig minelli often raises which central bioethical concern?

○ whether assisted suicide should only be permitted for patients with terminal cancer
○ whether individuals should be allowed to travel internationally to access assisted suicide services not legal in their home countries
○ whether physicians should be required to provide palliative care before offering assisted suicide
○ whether minors can request assisted suicide without parental consent

Explanation:

First Question (Landmark Historical Cases)

The case of Cruzan v. Missouri (more formally Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health) dealt with a competent adult's right to refuse life - sustaining treatment (including a feeding tube) even if it leads to death. Cobbs v. Grant is about informed consent in medical treatment. Bouvia v. Superior Court was about a patient's right to refuse treatment but in a different context (a woman with a chronic condition wanting to refuse treatment and be allowed to die, but the core of the right to refuse life - sustaining treatment in the context of a feeding tube is most directly associated with Cruzan v. Missouri). Saikewicz was about a non - competent patient's right to treatment.

Dignitas is a Swiss organization that provides assisted suicide services. Many people from other countries where assisted suicide is not legal travel to Switzerland (where Dignitas operates) to access these services. So the central bioethical concern raised by news coverage of Dignitas and its founder is whether individuals should be allowed to travel internationally to access assisted suicide services not legal in their home countries. The other options: the first is too narrow (not just about terminal cancer patients), the third is not the main concern related to Dignitas' international context, and the fourth is not the central concern regarding Dignitas' operations.

Answer:

A. Cruzan v. Missouri

Second Question (Ripped from the Headlines)