Tuesday, January 28, 2020
Mergers and Acquisitions in Pharmaceutical Industry
Mergers and Acquisitions in Pharmaceutical Industry Businesses grow externally by acquiring, or combining with, other ongoing businesses. When two companies combine, the acquiring company generally pays for the acquired business either with cash or with its own securities, and the acquired companys liabilities and assets are transferred to the acquiring company. A merger is technically a combination of two or more companies in which all but one of the combining companies legally cease to exist and the surviving company continues in operation under its original name. A consolidation is a combination in which all of the combining companies are dissolved and a new firm is formed. The term merger is generally used to describe both of these types of business combinations. An acquisition is also used interchangeably with merger to describe a business combination. 1.1 Types of Merger Mergers are generally classified according to whether they are horizontal, vertical, or conglomerate. A Horizontal merger is a combination of two or more companies that compete directly with one another. A vertical merger is a combination of companies that may have a buyer-seller relationship with one another. A conglomerate merger is a combination of two or more companies in which neither competes directly with the other and no buyer-seller relationship exists. 1.2 Form of Merger Transactions A merger transaction may be a stock purchase or an asset purchase. The acquiring company buys the stock of the to-be-acquired company and assumes its liabilities. In an asset purchase, the acquiring company buys only the assets (some or all) of the to-be-acquired company and does not assume any of its liabilities. Normally, the buyer of a business prefers an asset purchase rather than a stock purchase, because unknown liabilities, such as any future lawsuits against the company, are not incurred. 1.3 Joint Ventures Some companies who dont want to merge are choosing an option of joint ventures. In joint venture two (unaffiliated) companies contribute financial and/or physical assets, as well as personnel, to a new company formed to engage in some economic activity, such as production or marketing of a product. 2.0 Pharmaceutical MA Mergers are not new in the pharmaceutical industry; however, in last few years there is lot of heat at the level of pharmaceutical merger activity and many firms are using joint ventures and strategic partnerships to develop and market new products. The pharmaceutical industry is highly regulated, extremely complex, and filled with financial and economic challenges and points of interest. Finance managers in the industry are faced with many issues including; managed care, insurance, reimbursement, patents and generic competition, licensing, royalties, co-promotions, joint ventures, co-marketing rights, high risk and high cost research and development, parallel import issues, and international regulations. These issues need to be explored in an effort to understand the reasons for the industrys current structure and how that structure is driving increased consolidation through mergers and acquisitions. The pharmaceutical industry is by most standards a mature industry and highly profitable for those companies lucky enough to develop blockbuster medical treatments which are patent protected for lengthy periods to help companies recover their research and development investments. The pharmaceutical industry has experienced a high rate of MA activity in the 1980s and 1990s. Most of the leading firms in 2003 are the result of one or more horizontal mergers for example, GlaxoSmithKlines merger includes GlaxoWellcome and SmithKline Beecham; Pfizer is the combination of Pfizer, Warner-Lambert, and Pharmacia, which included Upjohn. 3.0 Reasons for MA To increase market share To gain control of a blockbuster drug existing or potential To gain entry into a high growth therapeutic area To enhance RD productivity Access to new technology platform To expand Geographic scope Patent expiration Pipeline Stuffing At pharmaceutical firms both large and small, profits are under constant pressure because blockbuster drugs that have made immense profits for many years eventually lose their patent protection and face vast competition from generic versions. In the U.S., generic drugs now hold between a sixty and seventy percent market share by volume. This puts pressure on large research based drug firms to develop new avenues for profits. One such avenue is partnerships with and investments in young biotech companies, but profits from such ventures will, in most cases, be slow to appear. Meanwhile, the major, global drug firms are investing billions in-house on biotech research and development projects, but new blockbusters are elusive. For example, Pfizer historically invested about $7.8 billion yearly on RD. That money is invested in carefully designed research programs with specific goals. As of early 2010, Pfizer had about 500 projects in development, with 133 of those in Phase I trials or beyond. Biologic drugs accounted for 27 projects under development, and they were part of the firms invest to win areas that focus on potential blockbuster drugs. Much of the future success for the worlds major drug companies will lie in harnessing their immense financial power along with their legions of salespeople and marketing specialists to license and sell innovative new drugs that are developed by smaller companies. There are dozens of exciting, smaller biotech companies that are focused on state-of-the-art research that lack the marketing muscle needed to effectively distribute new drugs in the global marketplace. To a large degree, these companies rely on contracts and partnerships with the worlds largest drug manufacturers. In addition to money to finance research and salespeople to promote new drugs to doctors, the major drug makers can offer expertise in guiding new drugs through the intricacies of the regulatory process. While these arrangements may not lead to blockbuster drugs that will sell billions of pills yearly to treat mass market diseases, they can and often do lead to very exciting targeted drugs that can produce $300 mi llion to $1 billion in yearly revenues once they are commercialized. A string of these mid-level revenue drugs can add up to a significant amount of yearly income. One of the most obvious reasons to merge or acquire is a shortfall in the RD pipeline. This was the position Glaxo faced in 1995 when Zantac, the worlds best-ever selling drug at the time was coming to the end of its lifespan. Following its timely acquisition of Wellcome, the company renewed its pipeline to create a substantial and innovative asset, which included drugs like Seroxat still in the global top ten seven years after the deal. Astra and Zeneca achieved geographic expansion and increased critical mass and, above all, shored up two increasingly vulnerable portfolios with their 2000 merger. 4.0 Risks of MA The payoff of growth resulting from a merger can be enormous for pharmaceutical companies. However, some statistics about mergers and acquisitions across industries and in general communicate the inherent risks in choosing to proceed with the integration of two different companies. Some of the researched statistics, noted in Pharmaceutical Executive in January 2001, are as follows: 75% of large mergers fail to create shareholder value greater than industry averages Productivity drops 50% following the announcement of a merger Leadership attrition soars to 47% within three years following a merger Employee satisfaction drops 14% following mergers 80% of employees feel senior management cares more about economics than about product quality or people 5.0 History of Pharmaceutical MA In 1927, Merck merged with Powers-Weightman-Rosengarten, which used to produce antimalarial quinine. In 1959, Johnson Johnson acquired McNeil laboratories and added Tylenol to its product list. In 2000, Pfizer acquired Warner- Lambert Company and Lipitor was added to Pfizers portfolio.The trend continues till today with Sanofi and Aventis and last year, we saw mega mergers like Pfizer acquired Wyeth for $68 billion and after six weeks of the mega merger, Merck acquired Schering Plough for $41.1 billion. Moreover, Roche inked a deal of $47 billion deal with Genentech and small player Biotech heavyweight Gilead (GILD) also paid $1.4 billion for CV Therapeutics (CVTX). 5.1 Merck and Schering-plough Merger Merck has entered into a definitive merger agreement with Schering-Plough. According to the agreement, Merck and Schering-Plough has combined, under the name Merck, in which the surviving entity is Schering plough and because of that the merger is known as reverse merger transaction. This transaction valued at approximately $41,100 million ($41.1 billion) payable in cash and stock. Under the terms of the agreement, Schering-Plough shareholders receive 0.5767 shares and $10.50 in cash for each share of Schering-Plough. Each Merck share will automatically become a share of the combined company. In the merger, Merck shareholders own approximately 68% of the combined company, and Schering-plough shareholders own 32%.The aggregate consideration will be comprised of a combination of approximately 44% cash and 56% stock. This merger had benefited Merck in several ways. It added up to 18 products in Mercks pipeline. This merger is structured in an unusual manner, this is generally done for tax saving purposes but here is some other reason. Schering Plough and Johnson and Johnson has contract over the sale of Ramicade and Sympony. The contract said that if ownership of any of the company changes then the other company is entitled for both the products but as the merger is reversely structured and Schering Plough is the surviving corporation the chances to breach the contract is less; though the surviving corporation as the name Merck . Then also Johnson Johnson has filed for arbitration over the contract. The legislation is still in the process and Merck is having the advantage of both the products. 5.2 Pfizer and Warner-Lambert merger Pfizers hostile bid for Warner-Lambert resulted from Warner-Lamberts attempt to merge with American Home Products. Actually, Pfizer was not looking at taking over Warner-Lambert and was happy with them as an independent company. However, Warner-Lamberts actions put the company at play. The result of the hostile merger resulted in Pfizer as the clear leader of the two companies. The difficult merger included the trading of stock for stock and the breaking up of the other deal. Warner-Lambert was also happy as an independent company. However, even though the merger was hostile, Warner-Lambert did seem to like Pfizers products, reputation, and values. Prior to this merger, basically all of the industry mergers of the past decade failed to increase, or even maintain, market share and value. As a result of ongoing productivity initiatives and cost savings from the Warner-Lambert integration, Pfizers operating margin has improved more than eight full percentage points since 1995. This is o ne of the best performances in the industry. 5.3 Sanofi-Aventis Merger On January 26, 2004, Sanofi-Synthelabo announced an unsolicited exchange offer for shares of Aventis Pharmaceuticals. They offered fifty five billion dollars, or forty-seven billion euros for Aventis shares. This offer price came along with estimation that they could create two billion dollars in synergies by combining the two firms. They also reaffirmed that the offer was based on the total portfolio, and that they didnt intend on divesting any products that didnt have any anti-trust conflicts. The Supervisory Board of Aventis unanimously rejected the bid from Sanofi responding that it was not in Aventis shareholders and employees best interest to allow Sanofi to acquire Aventis shares. French newspapers buzzed with rumors that several firms might step up and try to be a white knight to Aventis. Those firms included Johnson and Johnson, Pfizer, and Novartis. Sanofis management was confident that they would not have to increase their offer for Aventis since most firms would not be in a position to merge with Aventis. It was also rumored that if Sanofi was not successful in buying Aventis, that they would be subject to an acquisition from another firm. Glaxo was rumored to be interested in buying Sanofi for their pipeline. Aventis had been repeatedly rejecting the offer from Sanofi arguing that the bid is severely undervaluing their company. Aventiss management believed that they were better off as a stand-alone firm so that they can focus on organic growth. Aventiss chief executive, Igor Landau, openly disputed the offer from Sanofi saying that they would have to improve the bid by at least forty or fifty percent to make Aventis interested. However, Aventis tried to find a white knight to enter into a friendly merger with to fend off Sanofi. The potential white knight that showed the most interest was Swiss drug maker Novartis Pharmaceuticals. Novartis said that they would be interested in entering merger negotiation with Aventis, if the French government would remain neutral. Sanofi wasnt too concerned about any white knight scenarios being that they had the support from the French government. In late April, Novartis agreed to enter into talks with Aventis regardless of the French governments public opposition to a Swiss firm ruining their chances for a French national champion. Rumors were circulating that Novartis was prepared to offer a bid of up to eighty-three billion dollars, or seventy billion euro. This would be a significant improvement for the shareholders compared to the Sanofi offer. These rumors caused the French government to encourage talks between Sanofi and Aventis board members. Finally on April 26, Aventis accepted an improved bid from Sanofi to create the third largest drug company in the world. The improved bid is valuing Aventis at sixty-four billion dollars, or fifty-four billion euros. The improved stock and cash offer was approximately a fourteen percent increase from the original takeover offer. This is the conclusion to three-month takeover battle between these two companies. Aventis has been trying to defend their company against Sanofi for the past three months. They both entered into a cooling off period after three months of publicly sniping at each other and filing lawsuits. On April 27 the European Commission approved the planned merger, followed by the Federal Trade Commissions approval on July 29. By early August it was known that the tender offer had been a success leading to the birth of Sanofi-Aventis on August 20. 6.0 Ten-Year Data on Pharmaceutical Mergers and Acquisitions During the 10 years ended December 31, 2009, a total of 1,345 mergers and acquisitions of pharmaceutical assets and pharmaceutical companies were announced, with disclosed prices totaling more than $694 billion, according to DealSearchOnline.com. GlaxoSmithKline was responsible for the largest of the pharmaceutical mergers and acquisitions. GlaxoWellcome announced a $74 billion merger with SmithKline Beecham in 2000, resulting in the entity now known as GlaxoSmithKline. Pfizer, Inc. announced two of the largest pharmaceutical mergers and acquisitions of the decade, including its $68 billion acquisition of Wyeth, Inc. in 2009 and its $56 billion acquisition of Pharmacia Corporation in 2002. Five of the pharmaceutical companies that were acquired in the past 10 years posted revenues in the tens of millions at the time of acquisition: SmithKline Beecham, Wyeth, Aventis, Pharmacia and Schering Plough. Further, in all but one of the 55 largest pharmaceutical mergers and acquisitions announced during the past decade, each of which is valued at a price exceeding $1.5 billion. Most of the 25 largest pharmaceutical mergers acquisitions announced in the past 10 years feature an acquirer that made five or more deals during the decade ended December 31, 2009, including Pfizer. In addition to Pfizer, these pharmaceutical acquirers include Abbott Laboratories, Johnson Johnson, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Teva Pharmaceutical Industries. Teva Pharmaceutical acquired Barr Pharmaceuticals for $8.96 billion in 2008 and Teva Pharmaceutical acquired Ivax Corporation for $7.96 billion in 2005. Abbott Laboratories acquired Solvay Pharmaceuticals for $7.6 billion in 2009 and Abbott Laboratories acquired Knoll Pharmaceutical for $7.2 billion in 2000. Johnson Johnson acquired Pfizers consumer health care unit for $16.6 billion in 2006 and Johnson Johnson acquired ALZA Corporation for $12.3 billion in 2001. Three of the top 25 pharmaceutical mergers and acquisitions announced in the past decade were announced during 2009, In addition to Pfizers acquisition of Wyeth and Abbott Laboratories acquisition of Solvay Pharmaceuticals, 2009 saw Merck Co.s acquisition of Schering-Plough Corporation for $41.1 billion. The mega-deals that comprise the top 25 pharmaceutical mergers and acquisitions of the past decade were announced at the rate of one or two per year from 2000 to 2004, but from 2005 to 2009 increased to the rate of three to four per year. Other notable deals announced in 2000 through 2009 include Sanofi-Synthelabos $65.5 billion acquisition of Aventis in 2004 and Bayer AGs $21.5 billion acquisition of Schering AG in 2006. Pharmaceutical Mergers and Acquisitions, 2000 to 2009 Year          Dollar Total     Number of Deals 2000          $97,424,934,321  41 2001          $27,749,309,161  87 2002          $66,093,147,595  147 2003          $23,625,371,126  173 2004          $95,213,138,700  171 2005          $46,553,632,500  128 2006          $74,806,033,300  138 2007          $71,600,790,685  180 2008          $40,664,107,740  140 2009          $147,237,047,186 140 10-Year Total $690,967,512,314 1,345 Its been a busy decade for pharma dealmaking. During the 10 years that ended Dec. 31, 2009, a total of 1,345 mergers and acquisitions of pharmaceutical assets and companies were announced, with disclosed prices totaling more than $694 billion, according to DealSearchOnline.com. The biggest deal: GlaxoWellcomes $74 billion merger with SmithKline Beecham in 2000 that created GlaxoSmithKline. That year, pharma did more than $97 billion worth of deals. 7.0 Future of MA from CEO perspective  Former Schering-Plough Corp. Chief Executive Officer Fred Hassan, who presided over the companys $41.1 billion sale, last year, said he expects to see more consolidation in the pharmaceutical industry. Large drugmakers will need to merge in order to fund expensive, complex areas of research, such as Alzheimers disease. Smaller companies also will be forced to sell themselves as they run out of cash in the tight credit markets. One reason deals are necessary is because the innovation investments are becoming larger and larger and it makes it easier when people can combine their resources to make the big, deep bets that you need to make for difficult diseases, Hassan said. That is why you are going to see more of these deals. 8.0 Top MA activity in 2010: While things have cooled off a bit in big pharma, there is still some major acquisition action going on in 2010. Though year 2010 was not of big mergers but there were still some MA activity have seen. List of 2010 MA is shown in table 3. 8.1Teva- Ratiopharm Teva, the generics giant bought Ratiopharm for just under $5 billion, beating out Pfizer and Actavis for the German company. Ratiopharm is Germanys second largest generics producer and the sixth largest generic drug company worldwide. The Ratiopharm purchase marks the biggest takeover in the generic drugs market since Teva bought Barr Pharmaceuticals for $7.46 billion in 2008. The combined entity will hold the leading market position in 10 European markets, including the U.K., Hungary, Italy, Spain, Portugal and the Netherlands, as well as a top three ranking in 17 countries, including Germany, Poland, France and the Czech Republic. Teva also expects its sales to nearly double in Canada as a result of the deal. Shlomo Yanai, Tevas president and CEO, said during an investors call that the acquisition was key component in its 2015 strategy. By that time, the company expects $31 billion in revenue and $6.8 billion in net income. Pfizer had been very interested in Ratiopharm, but wasnt prepared to put significantly more than 3 billion on the table, according to the Wall Street Journal, citing sourcesSources say that Pfizer might cast its eye on Stada, another German generics maker. Stadas stock shot up 2 percent to an 18-month high after news of the Teva-Ratiopharm deal broke, according to Reuters. 8.2 Merck-Millipore Merck completed the acquisition of life science company Millipore on Feb. 28. Millipores products and services are used for drug discovery, process development and drug manufacturing. Merck acquired Millipore for approximately $7.0 billion.The companies decided on a price of $107 that was paid in cash per share for Millipores common stock. Table 1: Top 20 MA deals since 2000 Rank Partners Date Value, US$m 1 Pfizer Warner Lambert Feb 00 $90,000 2 Pfizer Wyeth Jan 09 $68,000 3 Sanofi Aventis Apr 04 $65,000 4 Pfizer Pharmacia Jul 02 $60,000 5 PG Gillette Jan 05 $57,000 6 Roche Genentech Jul 08 $46,800 7 Merck Schering-Plough Mar 09 $41,000 8 Boston Sci. Guidant Dec 05 $27,000 9 Bayer Schering AG Mar 06 $21,500 10 Dow Rohm Haas Jul 08 $18,800 11 JJ Warner Lambert Jun 06 $16,600 12 AstraZeneca MedImmune Apr 07 $15,600 13 Amgen Immunex Dec 01 $14,800 14 Schering-Plough Organon Mar 07 $14,500 15 Merck KgaA Serono Sep 06 $13,300 16 Novartis Alcan Apr 08 $11,000 17 Fisher Sci. Thermo Elec. May 06 $10,600 18 JJ Alza Mar 01 $10,500 19 General Elec. Amersham Oct 03 $9,500 20 Takeda Millennium Apr 08 $8,800 Table 2: Top MA deals 2009 Rank Partners Date Value, US$m 1 Pfizer Wyeth Jan 09 $68,000 2 Roche Genentech Mar 09 $48,000 3 Merck Schering-Plough Mar 09 $41,000 4 TPG IMS Health Nov 09 $5,200 5 GSK Stiefel Apr 09 $3,600 6 Dainippon Sepracor Sep 09 $2,600 7 BMS Medarex Jul 09 $2,400 8 Sanofi-Aventis Chattem Dec 09 $1,900 9 Watson Arrow Group Jun 09 $1,750 10 Varian Agilent Jul 09 $1,500 11 Gilead CV Therapeutics Mar 09 $1,400 12 Abbott Adv. Med. Optics Mar 09 $1,300 13 JJ Cougar May 09 $970 14 Lundbeck Ovation Feb 09 $900 15 Onyx Proteolix Oct 09 $850 Table 3: Top MA deals 2010 Rank Partners Date Value, US$m 1 Novartis/Nestle Alcon Aug 10 $28,300 2 Sanofi Genzyme Aug 10 $18,500 3 Merck KgaA Millipore Feb 10 $7,000 4 Teva Ratiopharm Mar 10 $4,925 5 OSI Astellas May 10 $4,000 6 Reckitt SSL Jul 10 $3,900 7 NBTY The Carlyle Group Jul 10 $3,800 8 Abbott Piramal May 10 $3,700 9 Pfizer King Oct 10 $3,600 10 Grifols Talecris Jun 10 $3,400 11 Biovail Valeant Jun 10 $3,300 12 Celgene Abraxis Jun 10 $2,900 13 Covidien ev3 Jun 10 $2,600 14 Crucell JJ Sep 10 $2,300 15 McKesson US Oncology Nov 10 $2,000 16 Wuxi C. River (term.) Apr 10 $1,600 17 Cardinal Kinray Nov 10 $1,300 18 Aspen Sigma (term.) May 10 $1,240 19 Qualitest Endo Sep10 $1,200 20 Inventiv Thomas H Lee May 10 $1,100 21 3M Cogent Aug 10 $943 22 Boehringer Ing. SSP Feb 10 $913 23 BMS ZymoGenetics Sep 10 $885 24 Perrigo PBM Holdings Mar 10 $808 25 Avid Eli Lilly Nov 10 $800
Sunday, January 19, 2020
Las Vegas is the Best Vacation Spot :: persuasive, informative
Las Vegas is one of the nation's favorite vacation destinations. It's a 24-hour city where gambling is a loved past-time and dreams of striking it rich can come true. But Las Vegas has many attractions and casino action is just one of them. Las Vegas is the best vacation spot because it offers entertainment for the whole family, unique marriages, and plenty of activities for children. Because Las Vegas was usually considered a adult city, visitors in the past have often left children at home. However, this desert community now offers many daytime activities for kids. Nearly all of the larger hotels have some form of entertainment for children, and some even offer special supervised children's programs. Today's gambling meccas offer an array of activities for the whole family. Contrary to the adult-only atmosphere of the past, Las Vegas now promotes a child-friendly environment that's hard to resist. Roller coasters, water parks, virtual reality theaters, and an assortment of museums have sprung up across the city of Las Vegas. In Las Vegas, two words spoken as frequently as "hit me" and "double down" are without a doubt, "I do". Pat from "Las Vegas Weddings" says, "marriage license are issued one every 5 and half minute." Among the famous who have married in Las Vegas are Elvis and Priscilla Presley, Frank Signature and Mia Farrow, Richard Gere and Cindy Crawford, and Bruce Willis and Demi Moore. 24 hours a day, seven days a week, wedding vows are taken at drive-up windows, on bungee jumping platforms, boats, in helicopters, and at dozens a wedding chapels. No legal residency is required. Blood test are not needed and there is no waiting period. A 16 year old can even get married with the consent of a parent for only $35 dollars. Andrea 8.@ aol.com states," Marriages is Las Vegas total more than 100,000 per year, due in part to the ease of getting a marriage license." After a long day of exploring the diverse offering of Las Vegas, your tired and aching muscles may be screaming out for a relaxing massage, facial, or an herbal wrap. On the other hand, maybe your body is use to a regular workout and your feel guilty about lounging around the pool; or casino all day. Alas, help is on the way! Many of the large resort hotels feature complete spa facilities, including sauna, exercise programs, and gym equipment.
Saturday, January 11, 2020
Ethics and Moral reasoning Essay
Facing Life While Fighting For an End Every one of us will stare down the face of death at some point in our lives; however, some will face it in much more unpleasant circumstances then others. We all have a right to choose what we want to do with our bodies. We even have the right to decide that we no longer wish to endure the pain and suffering of a terminal illness. Terminal illness is when someone is suffering from something that will eventually take their life regardless of any medical interventions. In this paper I will discuss the point in which a person has a right to decide if they want to die and what processes are ethically moral in aiding them in seeing their wishes come to fruition. Medicine has created more ways to cure or to minimize a person’s suffering from diseases that were once fatal or painful. Medical technology has given us the power to sustain the lives of patients whose physical and mental capabilities cannot be restored, whose degenerating conditions cannot be reversed, and whose pain can not be eliminated. As medicine struggles to pull more and more people away from the edge of death, there are pleas for relief outpouring from the tortured, deteriorated lives that all of us be merciful and give them the relief they need. (C Andre, and M Velazquez, KND). When a person is faced with the end of their life, it is said that we should agree that the absence of pain and the pride of the person should be taken into great consideration. When a terminally ill person is no longer capable of intellectual pursuits, is in constant pain and must rely on others for all of their needs, Mill feels that it is a more dignified choice to end the suffering, therefor fulfilling the â€Å"absence of pain†principle (pain including one’s inability to seek higher pleasure through intellectual pursuit) (J Conley, April 2010). Doctors are at the epicenter of controversies regarding end of life issues and face so much scrutiny from both sides of opposing groups. Some doctors believe that it is oka y to assist the patient in their wish to end their suffering by simply discontinuing any and all lifesaving interventions. Other doctors believe that every effort must be made to save the person’s life until there is nothing else left to do. Once the doctor has reached this point they will place patients under hospice care and the patients are given medications to treat their pain such as morphine. The doses are in such high amounts that the patient is no longer coherent and able to make decisions on their own. They will usually expire within days following their first does due to how the medication slows down the heart and breathing. Supporters of the utilitarian ethic believe that the benefits of assisted suicide outweigh the costs. They argue that assisted suicide allows terminally ill patients to avoid needless pain and misery in their final days. They believe that it will allow a patient to maintain control over the timing and manner of their death verses having to face an unsure timeline and suffer for what could be far longer and harder than a physician may give. The utilitarian believes th at this would ensure that they would die with a sense of dignity. Post importantly it would insure that an individual’s right to self-autonomy would be honored at the end of life (M. Levin, KND). If you look at the views of a deontologist they would oppose this method because deontologists are all about duty. While both deontologists and utilitarian’s would typically do the same thing, Deontologists act out of duty, and would make their decision only once they see that the patient is on their last leg and is unable to respond for themselves, while the utilitarian acts out of a means to provide a sense of peace. When you are a utilitarian people may view you as irrational and emotional and not take you serious, while a deontologist may come across as a bit crude or even heartless. The downside to being in such a place to make these tough decisions can bring about certain issues such as: individuals feeling pressured to terminate their life because of a misperception of their diagnosis or prognosis; because of depression; or because of a concern for the burden they place on others and the depletion of their assets. Some individuals may feel pressured to end life by selfish family members or caregivers. This is why it is so important for the professionals to handle each case as though it is so sensitive. Each patient must be thoroughly analyzed to make sure that they meet the proper criteria for end of life intervention. Life is about growing and learning, however, sometimes we are very limited to what we are able to do. This has no bearing on the quality of life and in no way should be used in ones decision to end their life nor should doctors look at limitations as a good reason to end life. The only times someone should be allowed to choose death over life is if they are unable to live a life that is rich and full of opportunity in spite of their illness. Meaning, that the illness is causing too much pain or that the illness in not allowing them to enjoy certain activities that they normally love doing. Then and only then the person should be able to choose what they want to do. Let me clarify this a little further. As we get older we will all eventually not be able to enjoy certain activities that we were once were able to, this alone would not be a reason to want to take your life, because your quality of life has not been interrupted. What would be a good reason is a person confined to a bed, being taken care of twenty-four-seven by a loved one or care giver and doctors have said that the chances of healing are not there. We will all stare down death in the face at some point. However, life is not about dying, but about living. If a person cannot live a life rich and full of meaning due to a terminal illness, they have the right to choose to live or die. If those rights are infringed upon the person withholding one’s personal rights should face dire consequences. Life is hard as it is, but then to be dyeing and living it in pain and suffering would be unimaginable and more inhumane then having it ended with the assistance of a medical professional on an at will basis. REFERENCES Ituriguy, July 5, 2008. The Decision To End One’s Own Life Is A Fundamental Human Right. Retrieved March 10, 2014 from www.opposingviews.com Wikipedia, KND. Utilitarianism. Retrieved: March 24, 2014 from www.wikipedia.com C. Andrea and M. Valdez, KND. Assisted Suicide: A Right or A Wrong? Retrieved: March 24, 2014 from www.scu.edu J. Conley, April 2010. Kantian vs. Utilitarian Ethics of Euthanasia. Retrieved: March 24, 2014 from www.wp4dying.blogspot.com M. Levine, KND. PHYSICIAN-ASSISTED SUICIDE: LEGALITY AND MORALITY. Retrieved: March 24, 2014, from: www.levinlaw.com
Friday, January 3, 2020
The Great Lewis And Clark Expedition - 1967 Words
Haolun Xu Mrs. Skinner English 1106 11 May 2015 The Great Lewis and Clark Expedition I never learnt anything about the U.S. history before I came to a high school in Boston. The stories about Native Americans and exploration of west had always attracted me because nothing like that ever happened in the Chinese history. And this is the reason why I am going to do the Lewis and Clark Expedition. They were just so brave to explore a land that the Americans knew nothing about. Not only their spirit, the journals they kept and the maps they made were also precious gifts for the explorers after them. Lewis and Clark’s Corps of Discovery took place from 1803 to 1806, which are the years during the presidency of Thomas Jefferson. They described†¦show more content†¦Ledyard decided to travel across Siberia to the western coast of North America. Even though this was not a very good plan for exploring the West, it was still better than nothing. However, during his journey, the Russians thought Ledyard was up to something in t heir country so they captured him and expelled him from Siberia. This exploration did not succeed. Ledyard gave up but Jefferson never gave up his dream on exploring the West. In 1792 Jefferson became the secretary of states. He tried to draw Dr. Moses, a Philadelphia physician and botanist into his project of exploring the West. Jefferson wanted the exploration so bad that he offered Dr. Moses a big amount of gold if Dr. Moses could lead the exploration. Just like before, this plan never came reality. In 1793, Jefferson sponsored Andre Michaux, a French botanist to travel to the Pacific Ocean. However, due to the bad relationship between the United States and Spain government, which claimed jurisdiction over Louisiana, Michaux never crossed Mississippi, which is border on the east side of Louisiana. Jefferson made no major attempts about the exploring until he became the third president of United States in 1801. As the president, Jefferson had much more resources and more finance s upport to achieve his dream about exploring the West. In his position, he also realized that the exploring became more and more necessaryShow MoreRelatedLewis And Clark Expedition : The Great Expedition2140 Words  | 9 Pages Lewis and Clark Expedition The Lewis and Clark expedition was amongst one of the first major American expeditions. This expedition helped the United States advance in science, land as well as gaining many valuable resources. The Lewis and Clark expedition is also an amazing American story. Lewis and Clark went through extraordinary situations to expedite Americas growth and science. They accomplished this expedition with strenuous encounters with the NativeRead MoreLewis and Clark Expedition Essay926 Words  | 4 PagesThis paper will explain why Lewis and Clark are two of the greatest explorers in American history. Some of the distinguishing factors of these explorers and the three main points in this paper are their exploration of the uncharted west by way of the Missouri river, the many discoveries made along the way, and the effect they had on the westward expansion of the United States. In January 1803, Thomas Jefferson sent a confidential message to Congress asking for approval and funding of the explorationRead MoreThe United States Of The Mississippi River1515 Words  | 7 PagesSt. Charles with cheers from the crowd†¦into unknown civilization.†(Lewis and Clark) The United States of America was considered to be all of the land east of the Mississippi river. All the land west of the river was, as they thought, a remote and uncivilized part of the world. Sent by President Thomas Jefferson to find the fabled Northwest Passage, Meriwether Lewis and William Clark led a very important, but dangerous expedition to explore this land and find a passage to the Pacific Ocean. TheseRead MoreThe Lewis And Clark Expedition1415 Words  | 6 PagesCaptain Meriwether Lewis and William Clark put their lives on the line only to return with information regarding the Pacific Northwest of the United States territory. Their reasons behind this journey, being to expan d the United States to the West, involved the entire nation but debatably, their accomplishments and the reaction of others became a major part of today’s history. The foremost reason behind the Lewis and Clark expedition was all based on Thomas Jefferson’s, president at the time, interestRead MoreThe Lewis And Clark Expedition1433 Words  | 6 PagesThe Lewis and Clark expedition was a truth that was to become the crowning accomplishment in the lifetime of the brilliant thinker, inventor, and founding father, Thomas Jefferson . It has become a profounding turning point throughout America’s history. Investigating the recently obtained Louisiana Territory, which nearly doubled the size of the country, arranged Jefferson the opportunity to widen the boundaries of the United States to include both the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. The threat of theRead MoreThe Great Rock Mountains By Thomas Jefferson1092 Words  | 5 PagesFrance. He had Meriwether Lewis to lead an expedition to the New Lands who turned to Wiliam Clark to be the Co-commanding captain which turned into the Lewis and Clark expedition. It was 1803. Thomas Jefferson was the president and he guided a piece of foreign diplomacy through the U.S. senate. After the Louisiana treaty was made, Jefferson took power of an exploration on a new purchased land beyond the â€Å"Great Rock Mountains†In the west. Jefferson wanted the expedition to travel through the MissouriRead MoreLewis And Clark s Impact On The United States1480 Words  | 6 PagesLewis And Clark Expedition The exploration of Lewis and Clark into the Louisiana Purchase had a great impact on the United States. During the exploration, they encountered Native American tribes, who exchanged items with them, and new species of plants and animals. The expedition of Lewis and Clark began on May 21,1804. Meriwether Lewis was born on August 18, 1774 in Albemarle County, Virginia. Lewis met Clark in 1795 in the army. Lewis was asked to be Thomas Jefferson’s private secretary in 1801Read MoreDon t Let Your Dreams Be Dreams1161 Words  | 5 Pagesâ€Å"Don’t let your dreams be dreams, just do it†, Shia Lebouf. Young Lewis and Clark dreamed of adventures and exploring. They did not let their dreams be dreams. As adults the two would lead an expedition of historical significance to the United States. â€Å"Meriwether Lewis was born on August 18, 1774, near Charlottesville, Virginia and was the boyhood neighbor of Thomas Jefferson.†(lewisandclark) â€Å"Meriwether Lewis spent much of his time as a youth in the outdoors, and developed an interest inRead MoreThe Lewis ( 1774 ) And William Clark1735 Words  | 7 PagesMeriweather Lewis (1774) and William Clark (1770) are famously known for their expedition through the Louisiana territory to the coast of the Pacific, along with Sacagawea from the Shoshone tribe. They traveled down the Ohio River, up the Missouri River, across the Continental Divide, and to the Pacific Ocean. In 1803, President Thomas Jefferson sent the Cords of Discovery to the land never traveled before by any American to explore. They traveled over 8000 miles and discovered over 300 unknown speciesRead MoreIn The Footsteps Of Lewis And Clark Essay1450 Words  | 6 PagesIn the Footsteps of Lewis and Clark The book I have just read, In the Footsteps of Lewis and Clark, is mainly about a man named Richard, his wife Arlette, and his two children Michele, 6, and Daniel, 4, who follow in almost the exact footsteps of Meriwether Lewis and William Clark. While the book talks about the family’s expedition it also, mainly, tells about the Lewis and Clark expedition and the history of it. Meriwether Lewis was born August 18th, 1774 near Charlottesville, Virginia
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)