Rhetorical Analysis Essay Sample of a Crime of Compassion by Barbara Huttmann

The rhetorical analysis of a Crime of compassion by Barbara Huttmann argues that in particular extreme circumstances of pain and suffering, the patients should have a death right if they request death. This is an argument based on a police officer Mac who is found to have lung cancer. The condition of Mac begins to fall, and in six months, his health deteriorated that no resuscitation or balancing of homeostasis would bring his health back to normalcy. This is after 52 times resuscitation in one month. Mac was kept on survival by the use of tube feeding where he only took liquid foods dipped through the veins by the use of a tube. My position is that the nurse was right on what did on the patient.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Applying logos in' A crime of compassion' convinces the readers and audience that the nurse is not guilty of murdering the patient. Every morning the nurse would ask for a no code from the doctor that the doctor declined because they believed in life extension of patients when their conditions would be unrecoverable. This is evident from the text "If a doctor had written a no code that is legally alternative, would he have felt less guilty?" "For any reason, we developed the means to prolong life, and now we are focused to use it. We do not have the right to die". The impact of logos would show the audience and support my argument that the nurse was right in her actions. As a result, this strengthens my argument since it makes the audience to question what is either logically wrong or right.

Analyzing Barbara Huttmann's A Crime of Comparison on an ethos' perspective, the audience understands and strengthens my argument and getting convinced that the nurse was not guilty of murder due to the efforts she made in keeping Mac alive all that while. This is evident from the text" Nothing I have ever done in my forty-seven years has taken much effort as it told to press that button". In addition, when analyzing a crime of Compassion on a pathos' perspective, my arguments are strengthened since the audience feeling bad that he had to undergo such kind of suffering and pain despite his wish of wanting to die. As a result, since the patient wished death and his condition would not recover, it was right for the nurse to press the button in to enable the patient (Mac) rest from the suffering. Mac was in a critical condition that even resuscitating him would not work since he had bedsores covering his hips, and faeces stuck in his body. Is this how one should live? As a result, this condition made the nurse wait until she was entirely sure that Mac was dead and inhibiting the resuscitation efforts by the code-team to bring him back to life. Despite the doctors and other health officials observing the rule of prolonging life, it was not economic and socially right to allow the patient to continue suffering even if she wished for death.

In conclusion, my argument is that the nurse was right since her decision was met after considering all the sociocultural aspects of the patient. Continuing prolonging of his life by the doctor would subject the patient (Mac) to extreme pain and suffering. In addition, the bills accrued would be high. Therefore, the nurse was right to switch off the support machine to cut the suffering period of the patient. Some argued that she played Gods part since she acted as the provider and taker of breath and life. However, my question is that should doctors prolong suffering and pain of a patient in the name of "prolonging life"? When he wishes for his death and knowing that he cannot afford recovery? According to me, the patient has the liberty and choice of choosing what is to be done in case of such an instance.