Emergency Medical Services (EMS) are always the most sought-after medical intervention when a loved one is on the verge of death, according to friends and family (Jesus, et al., 2014). In many cases, medical interventions prolong the patient’s life, even if just by an additional hour, day, or other quantitative amounts. Yet, the law has a different position on EMS interventions, especially if the patient is willing or not to be subjected to the medical interventions (Jesus, et al., 2014). (Jesus, et al., 2014). Hence, philosophical questions arise at the core of prolonging one’s life or letting the patient pass away without interference, which may help a person overcome their pains. In the United States, the law is pretty clear on several grounds where the patient’s wishes should prevail (Jesus, et al., 2014). The purpose of this study is to assess the legal provisions of the United States on “Living Will,” “Durable Power of Attorney,” “Healthcare Proxy,” and “Do Not Resuscitate (DNR)” as specified by the Emergency Medical Services (EMS).
The “living will” is a document designed to communicate in writing a person’s end-of-life wishes (Eisendrath & Jonsen, 1983). On the edge of death, a person is frequently not in the correct condition of mind or physical capacity to declare his or her wishes. The law of the United States permits advance planning through a written instrument, which is considered the living will. Via the living will, a person can select the person who will be accountable for making his decisions if he becomes incapacitated (Eisendrath & Jonsen, 1983). Hence, the individual consents to legal intervention if his/her wishes are not fulfilled at the moment of incapacity. In some situations, a person may request that no resuscitation operations be performed on him at the time of his death…