...basis of reducing suffering then they can do better with active euthanasia. He points out the inconsistency in discontinuing medical support but not going further with active euthanasia, because he sees no moral distinction between active and passive euthanasia, they are both intentional acts to terminate a life. Simply letting someone die is morally the same as killing someone so why is one more acceptable than the other? When a doctor lets a patient die, the doctor is not doing anything. In other words, contrary to how it may seem, doctors are acting by not acting. One is acting in the choice to not do anything. Rachel uses the example of a situation in which a doctor does not treat a patient of a life-threatening illness that is known to be treatable. By withholding treatment, the doctor is actually committing murder, However in a scenario where the illness is terminal withholding treatment is an acceptable practice based on the patient’s wishes. In these scenarios, active euthanasia would seem to be more humane but is not legal or acceptable. It seems to me that Rachel puts doctors in a situation where they must strictly either be torturers or murderers. In choosing to prolong the patient’s life, the doctor is criticized for prolonging suffering. If it is decided that medical support should no longer be given, the doctor is immediately a murderer. This is supported by Rachel’s’ argument that passive and active euthanasia have...
Words: 395 - Pages: 2
...Active vs. Passive Euthanasia 1. Question What is the difference between active and passive euthanasia and is one form better or worse than the other when it comes to ending someone’s life? 2. Introduction There are a few differences between active and passive euthanasia. Active euthanasia involves assisting someone that is dying so they die quicker and painlessly. Whereas, passive euthanasia involves letting someone that is sick die by not prolonging their life with medication. It does not involve “killing” them, but instead letting their ailment take them more slowly. Is one of these methods more humane than the other when someone is dying? Is it more acceptable to let someone suffer for a longer period of time? Or would it be better to assist someone that is dying to end his or her life with dignity? 3. Position Statement Someone that is ready to die should be allowed to chance to die with dignity and with active euthanasia, as long as they are in the right frame of mind to make that decision. 4. Supporting Reason Allowing someone that is terminally ill or dying to die with dignity gives respect to the person in his or her last days. If someone is dying and they want to end their life, and not suffer, they should be allowed to have help from doctors to make that decision. The alternative would be to have them suffer for the remainder of their days, waiting for their time to die. This can cause depression and feelings of hopelessness. Not a good way...
Words: 350 - Pages: 2
...The Disparity of Active and Passive Euthanasia The year 1976, as a law professor at Rutgers Law School and an author of multiple medical books named Norman L. Cantor recounted, faced a time of controversy in the medical field. A twenty-one-year-old woman named Karen Ann Quinlan became the topic of discussion after she suffered irreversible brain damage caused by drug and alcohol abuse. She fell into a permanent coma and was connected to a respirator in order to keep her heart beating; she received her nutrition and hydration from tubes. Her parents, after much deliberation, elected to remove their unresponsive daughter from life-support apparatuses. Due to a ruling of the New Jerseyan state court, her mother and father’s wishes were fulfilled....
Words: 741 - Pages: 3
...at all. Unjust people would use it differently than just people. Everyone would use it the same. Instructor Explanation: The answer can be found in “Gyges’ Ring” from Plato’s Republic. Points Received: 1 of 1 Comments: Question 3. Question : Rachels claims that once it has been decided that euthanasia is desirable in a case: Student Answer: a moral error has already been made. it has been decided that death is no greater an evil than the patient’s continued existence. it has been decided that the patient does not have a right to life. the amount of suffering of the patient becomes irrelevant. Instructor Explanation: The answer can be found in the article “Active and Passive Euthanasia” Points Received: 1 of 1 Comments: Question 4. Question : According to the videos, in which is it legal to commit assisted suicide? Student Answer: Canada Mexico Germany Switzerland Instructor Explanation: The answer can be found in the video “Right to Die, Assisted Suicide, Euthanasia Part 1 5” Points Received: 1 of 1 Comments:...
Words: 1190 - Pages: 5
...Euthanasia According to Webster’s dictionary, euthanasia is “intentional killing by act or omission of a dependent human being for his or her alleged benefit”. Clearly, everybody hopes that his or her death is gentle and easy, and bypasses pain and suffering and loss of dignity. However, the question of whether people can legally passively or actively end their own lives raise many issues. Some argue that by allowing euthanasia will permit people to look down on human life, as if it is not important and can be used for certain criminal circumstances. On the other hand, others argue that permitting people to take their own lives actually maintains human dignity, since people should not have to die painful deaths. I believe that human dignity and the value of human life can best be protected and preserved by permitting people to chose to stop treatments which prolong their lives, but without legalizing the active taking of lives. The philosopher Dyck is representative of the the position that euthanasia should never be legal, because it does not entail compassion for one, or one owns human dignity. Dyck proposes an alternative moral argument to euthanasia, the idea of “benemortasia.” Benemortasia is the belief that a “good” death doesn’t need to be painless or be fully controlled by the person.. Not only does Dyck argue that our definition of good death should change, but he has multiple arguments for why euthanasia is morally wrong. First off, one who causes someone...
Words: 998 - Pages: 4
...Active and Passive Euthanasia James Rachels was an American philosopher who specialized in ethics and animal rights. Over the course of his career has written six books and over 85 essays. In 1975, Rachels wrote the article “Active and Passive Euthanasia”, in which he argued that the distinction so important in the law between killing and letting die which was based on the principle of double effect. He argued that if we allow passive euthanasia, we should also allow active euthanasia because it is more humane and that there is really no moral difference between the two. In my paper I have chosen two questions to answer concerning the article written by James Rachels. Rachels offers two principal arguments against the distinction between active and passive euthanasia. What are these arguments? Passive euthanasia is when the doctor does not do anything to bring about the patient’s death because the patient ends up dying at whatever illness they may have. While active euthanasia is when the doctor does something to bring about the patient’s death, for example, the doctor gives a patient with cancer a lethal injection which causes the death of the patient. Rachels claims that "killing is not itself any worse than letting die." What support does he offer for this claim? Do you agree? Why or why not? Rachel argues that there really isn’t a moral difference between the two because many believe that killing someone is morally worse than letting someone die...
Words: 579 - Pages: 3
...Active and Passive Euthanasia Active and passive euthanasia have been debatable topics for years. The word “euthanasia”, derived from the Greek “eu-thanatos” simply means “a good death” (Perri, 1996). Passive (voluntary) euthanasia occurs when a terminally ill patient expressed his/her wish to remove life-supports and the patient is permitted to die “naturally” or “as a consequence of the disease.” Active (involuntary) euthanasia—that is the bringing about of a person's death without the consent of the person—it is almost always treated as homicide, even when the act can be recognized as producing a "merciful death" (Larue, 1999). It is often argued that doctors are justified in allowing their patients to die by withdrawing or withholding treatment, but are not justified in killing them. Although, active and passive euthanasia might seem generally accepted by the medical profession, at the same time, it is still broadly debated. As it is directly derived from the Rachels’s article, the debate revolves around the following statement: “it is permissible, at least in some cases, to withhold treatment and allow a patient to die, but it is never permissible to take any direct action designed to kill the patient” (364). There is a debate as to whether there is really any difference between active and passive euthanasia. In the minds of some, the removal of life-support, or passive euthanasia, is defined as "doing something to terminate life" (Larue, 1999). At the same time, "passive...
Words: 1909 - Pages: 8
...Euthanasia Euthanasia The act of putting death painlessly or allowing to die by withholding extreme medical measures, a person or animal suffering form an unbearable suffering disease or condition. Euthanasia, also known as assisted suicide, physician-assisted suicide, doctor-assisted and more loosely termed mercy killing, basically means to take a deliberate action with the express intention of ending a life to relieve intractable suffering. Some interpret euthanasia as the practice of ending a life in a painless manner. Many disagree with this interpretation. There are two types of euthanasia passive and euthanasia. Passive euthanasia is when life-sustaining treatments are withheld. The definition of passive euthanasia is often not clear cut. For example, if a doctor prescribes increasing doses of strong painkilling medications which may eventually be toxic for the patient, some may argue whether passive euthanasia is taking place - in most cases, the doctor's measure is seen as a passive one. Many claim that the term is wrong, because euthanasia has not taken place, and there is no intention to take life. Active euthanasia is lethal substances or forces that are used to end the patient's life. Active euthanasia includes life-ending actions conducted by the patient or somebody else. Passive is "letting a person die", and active is giving them a lethal injection. Personally I think that sometimes passive euthanasia is worse than active. For example the doctor may...
Words: 375 - Pages: 2
...Euthanasia Euthanasia is defined by the American Medical Association as “the administration of a lethal agent by another person to a patient for the purpose of relieving the patient’s intolerable and incurable suffering” (American Medical Association 2014). Euthanasia is currently illegal in all US states with the exception of Oregon as well as all of Europe aside from the Netherlands. The two concerns typically used to justify this are that life is thought to be precious and we are obligated to prolong it, not take it, as well as the Hippocratic Oath taken by doctors to “do no harm”. Though it currently remains illegal, there is an increase of support for euthanasia to be practiced in the US. Before assessing whether or not euthanasia is morally justifiable, there are two conceptual distinctions to be made. One is the concept of voluntary vs. involuntary euthanasia, and the other is active vs. passive euthanasia. Voluntary euthanasia is chosen by the patient himself or herself, while involuntary is chosen by someone other than the patient. Performing an action that will actively end the patient’s life is defined as active euthanasia, while passive euthanasia is performed by withholding treatment and allowing the person to die naturally. This difference is the basis of James Rachels’ argument in “Active and Passive Euthanasia.” Rachels believes that there is no moral difference between “killing” (active) and “letting-die” (passive). He believes that passive euthanasia defeats...
Words: 784 - Pages: 4
... INTRODUCTION TO CHRISTIAN ETHICS TOPIC: EUTHANASIA COURSE NO.: RELT 255 INSTRUCTOR: KIGUNDU NDWIGA, PhD BY: CHRISTINE W. THAIRU STHACH 1511 OCTOBER 2014 EUTHANASIA 'Euthanasia' is a compound of two Greek words - eu and thanatos meaning, literally, 'a good death'. Today, euthanasia is generally understood to mean the bringing about of a good death - 'mercy killing,' where one person ends the life of another person for the sake of this person whose life is to be ended. Euthanasia, also refers to the practice of intentionally ending a life in order to relieve pain and suffering, and a deliberate intervention undertaken with the express intention of ending a life to relieve intractable suffering. It incorporates an agent; a subject; an intention; a casual proximity, actions of the agent lead to the outcome. A non-voluntary euthanasia is illegal in most countries. For voluntary euthanasia the process has to:- i) Include patient request ii) Take into consideration the amount of suffering the patient is experiencing iii) Discuss and pursue alternative course of action iv) Presented to the patient all available information A person who undergoes euthanasia usually has an incurable condition. In many cases it is carried out at the person’s request but there are times when they may be too ill and the decision is made by relatives, medics or courts. Very often people will call euthanasia “mercy killing”, perhaps thinking of it for someone...
Words: 1367 - Pages: 6
...saying that euthanasia is not morally justifiable, and some people feel that it goes against one's human rights, people feel that it is not ethical. There are many aspects that are included in the interest that people have in this specific topic (Brock, 2012). Some feel that Active Euthanasia is wrong because one is physically committing murder, ending a individual's life, and feel that it is wrong because it is considered a crime in Canada (Jecker, Jenson,2007). Many individuals are against euthanasia in Canada, however some argue that Passive is not wrong and Active euthanasia is, however in this paper I will be arguing that the two types of euthanasia are morally justifiable (Jecker, Jenson, 2007). I argue that Active,...
Words: 1060 - Pages: 5
...Ethical Consideration of Euthanasia as an End of Life Decision Euthanasia is the act of intentionally causing the death of someone to end pain and suffering that they are experiencing. Euthanization encompasses many controversial variables that must be perceived when deciding whether or not it should be allowed and the ethics behind it. There are different aspects of euthanasia, such as active and passive methods that must be considered; where active is physically initiating death and passive is letting an individual die by removing or withholding treatment. There are also cultural aspects that affect people’s decisions and beliefs on the ethical reasoning with euthanasia. A person’s autonomy must also be considered in the decision making...
Words: 1725 - Pages: 7
...This essay will demonstrate that it is not “always morally worse to kill than it is to let die”. It will be argued that passive euthanasia (i.e. letting someone die) is not morally wrong and that active euthanasia (i.e. accelerating their death) is no less moral. However, the many complications associated with the legalisation of active euthanasia (and euthanasia in general) must be identified and addressed. These identified complications may be eliminated with an appropriate regulatory regime. Assuming that identified complications can be overcome, and having established that it is not always morally worse to kill than to let die, it will be demonstrated that active euthanasia should not be banned. Morality, as defined by the Oxford Dictionary, is “principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behaviour”1. Hinde states that the principles are influenced and changed by one’s society and culture but also “based in human nature”2. As morality is influenced by society, public opinion is important when it comes to controversial issues. Morality differs from place to place and evolves over time. To compound this diversity, changes in medical treatment, and discoveries which enhance medical knowledge evolves rapidly and what was not even conceivable in some cultures or at certain points in history are now commonly accepted. Developments in end of life care fall within this category. With our increased ability to prolong life, arguments can now be made...
Words: 3595 - Pages: 15
...Active Voluntary Euthanasia Active voluntary euthanasia can be considered a number of things, whether it is suicide or physician assisted suicide. Throughout this class, we have discussed various articles that dig into this issue and that I will be using in this paper to demonstrate what is accepted, and what is not by some of society’s leading scholars. Also, I will insert my own input to these views and offer more insight on what I believe is reasonable when it comes to active voluntary euthanasia. To begin, I will start off with Immanuel Kant’s article, “The Morality of Suicide.” Kant first discusses his views on people’s obligations to their own bodies. He talks about the right of freedom that we are all given, and that this freedom is to be used so as to protect life in a way. He argues that using freedom in ways that “abolish life” is “producing lifelessness,” and is therefore “self-contradictory” (385). To sum this part up, Kant believes that human beings should not “have the power to dispose of” their lives (385). After establishing his thoughts in this region, he moved on to that of suicide, which is his almost entirely against. He first comes across the argument saying that suicide is acceptable because “man is a free agent” (385). He counters this argument by explaining that yes man is a free agent, but that we are free to the point of “self-preservation” (385). To me, this means that we do things in life by our own choice, but usually these choices are made...
Words: 2110 - Pages: 9
...Euthanasia: A Moral Dilemma The word euthanasia is derived from two Greek words, “eu” which means “good” and “thanatos” which means “death,” thus, you have the translation “good death.” For many, when faced with a terminal disease or injury, it is all they truly want. That is, the ability to choose the right to die, in lieu of, a slow and painful death. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines Euthanasia as, “The act or practice of killing hopelessly sick or injured individuals in a relatively painless way for reasons of mercy,” and also, “The act of or practice of allowing a hopelessly sick or injured patient to die by taking less than complete medical measures to prolong life – mercy killing.” In those two separate definitions, you have the words that define the difference between active and passive euthanasia. “The act or practice of killing…” is what is termed as active euthanasia, in that it involves a person physically “doing” something to bring about the death of an individual. Whereas, “the act or practice of allowing…” is considered passive euthanasia, in that it allows a person to die. Normally, this entails the withholding or withdrawal of necessary medical equipment or medicine. Historically, both methods have evoked great emotional turmoil throughout society. Why? Because, it puts into dispute moral, cultural, social, and religious values that individual’s hold regarding their right to live, aswell as their right to die. Furthermore, individuals want to be able...
Words: 3345 - Pages: 14
