This site uses cookies.
Some of these cookies are essential to the operation of the site,
while others help to improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.
For more information, please see the ProZ.com privacy policy.
This person has a SecurePRO™ card. Because this person is not a ProZ.com Plus subscriber, to view his or her SecurePRO™ card you must be a ProZ.com Business member or Plus subscriber.
Affiliations
This person is not affiliated with any business or Blue Board record at ProZ.com.
Services
Translation, Interpreting, Editing/proofreading, Software localization, Voiceover (dubbing), Subtitling, Transcription, Training
Expertise
Specializes in:
Religion
Social Science, Sociology, Ethics, etc.
Folklore
Rates
All accepted currencies
U. S. dollars (usd)
Portfolio
Sample translations submitted: 1
English to Spanish: PHYSICIAN-ASSISTED SUICIDE AND EUTHANASIA General field: Medical Detailed field: Medical (general)
Source text - English PHYSICIAN-ASSISTED SUICIDE AND EUTHANASIA
Should physicians be granted the power to intentionally end the lives of their patients? Recent proposals to legalize physician-assisted suicide have raised this question and triggered intense legal, medical and social debate. For some individuals, the debate is fueled by their fear that medical technology may someday keep them alive past the time of natural death. However, this concern is unfounded for mentally competent adults who have a legal right to refuse or stop any medical treatment. It is also important to recognize that today’s health care climate lends itself more to under-treatment than over-treatment.
However, the present debate is not about refusing treatment or taking extraordinary measures. The issue is whether physicians should be allowed to intentionally kill their patients, either by providing the means of death or ending the patient's life by the doctor’s hands. There is a tremendous distinction between allowing someone to die naturally when medical technology cannot stop the dying process and causing someone to die through assisted suicide or euthanasia. The question is one of intent: Is the intention to cause the death of the patient?
The terms “physician-assisted suicide” and “euthanasia” are often used interchangeably. However, the distinctions are significant. The act of physician-assisted suicide involves a medical doctor who provides a patient the means to kill him or herself, usually by an overdose of prescription medication.
Meanwhile, euthanasia involves the intentional killing of a patient by the direct intervention of a physician or another party, ostensibly for the good of the patient or others. The most common form of euthanasia is lethal injection. Euthanasia can be voluntary (at the patient’s request), non-voluntary (without the knowledge or consent of the patient) or involuntary (against his or her wishes).
Legal Status
Euthanasia is illegal in the United States. Physician-assisted suicide is illegal by statute or common law in most states. Oregon is the only state where physician-assisted suicide is legal.
In 1997, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that there is no federal constitutional right to physician-assisted suicide. However, the decision does not address individual state constitutions, which could be interpreted by other courts to include a state right to physician-assisted suicide.
Many state legislatures have tackled this issue in recent years, with more than 25 rejecting bills to legalize physician-assisted suicide and nearly a dozen states adopting new laws to ban it. No state legislature has voted to legalize physician-assisted suicide.
Oregon approved a ballot initiative to legalize physician-assisted suicide in 1994 and reaffirmed the vote in 1997. Five other attempts to legalize physician-assisted suicide (or euthanasia) through ballot initiative (California in 1988 and 1992, Washington State in 1991, Michigan in 1998 and Maine in 2000) all failed.
Translation - Spanish EL SUICIDIO MEDICAMENTE ASISTIDO Y LA EUTANASIA
¿Deben los médicos ser otorgados el poder para terminar intencionalmente con las vidas de sus pacientes? Preguntas como esta han despertado un intenso debate social y médico sobre recientes propuestas para legalizar el suicidio médicamente asistido. Para algunos el debate es incitado por temor a que, algún día, la tecnología médica pueda retenerlos vivos después del tiempo natural de la muerte. Sin embargo, esta preocupación es infundada en adultos mentalmente competentes, los cuales tienen derecho legal para rehusar o parar cualquier tratamiento médico. Es también importante reconocer que la tendencia actual del cuidado médico se presta más a acortar tratamientos que a extenderlos.
Sin embargo, este debate no es acerca de rehusar tratamientos o tomar medidas extremas. El asunto es si los médicos deben ser permitidos a ejecutar la muerte de sus pacientes de manera intencional, ya sea proveyendo el medio que conduce a la muerte o interviniendo directamente en ella. Existe una gran diferencia entre permitir que alguien muera de forma natural, cuando la tecnología médica no puede impedir el proceso de la muerte, y el causar que alguien muera a través de un suicidio asistido o eutanasia. La interrogante en el tema tiene que ver con propósito: ¿Es la intención causar la muerte del paciente?
Los términos “suicidio médicamente asistido” y “eutanasia” son a menudo usados intercambiablemente. Sin embargo, las diferencias son significativas. El acto de suicidio médicamente asistido implica a un médico que provee a su paciente con los medios para suicidarse, usualmente por medio de una sobredosis de medicamento prescrito.
Por otro lado, la eutanasia implica el asesinato premeditado de un paciente por la intervención directa de un doctor u otra persona, “aparentemente” para el bienestar del paciente u otras personas. La forma más común de eutanasia es la inyección letal. La eutanasia puede ser voluntaria (por petición del paciente), no-voluntaria (sin el conocimiento o consentimiento del paciente) o involuntaria (en contra de la voluntad del paciente).
Estado legal
La eutanasia es ilegal en los Estados Unidos, y el suicidio médicamente asistido es ilegal por estatuto, o ley común, en la mayoría de los Estados. Oregon es el único Estado donde el suicidio médicamente asistido es legal.
En 1997, la Corte Suprema de los Estados Unidos determinó que no existe ningún derecho constitucional-federal para el suicidio médicamente asistido. Sin embargo, esta decisión no se dirige individualmente a las constituciones estatales, las cuales pueden ser interpretadas por otras cortes de manera que ellas hagan incluir un derecho estatal hacia la práctica del suicidio médicamente asistido.
Muchas legislaturas estatales han confrontado este asunto en años recientes, creando más de 25 proposiciones de ley que rechazan la legalización del suicidio médicamente asistido y cerca de una docena que adoptan leyes nuevas para su prohibición. Ninguna legislatura estatal ha votado para legalizar el suicidio médicamente asistido.
En 1994, el Estado de Oregon aprobó una iniciativa de voto para legalizar el suicidio médicamente asistido, y en 1997 lo reafirmó. Cinco otros intentos para legalizar el suicidio médicamente asistido (o eutanasia) a través de una iniciativa de votación (California en 1988 y 1992, Estado de Washington en 1991, Michigan en 1998 y Maine en el 2000) fallaron totalmente.
More
Less
Experience
Years of experience: 28. Registered at ProZ.com: Sep 2010.
Adobe Acrobat, Microsoft Excel, Microsoft Office Pro, Microsoft Word, Powerpoint
CV/Resume
CV available upon request
Bio
I was born and raised in South America; then went on to live for 20 years in the U.S. Now I'm living in Venezuela and doing something that I enjoy doing; translations. Because to me translating is more of a pleasure, an adventure and a masterpiece in the making, where learning becomes an ever learning experience. So I'm glad to be here and hope to be as much help to this website, as it has been to me.
Portfolio