Examlex
James Rachels: Active and Passive Euthanasia
Active euthanasia is the intentional termination of a patient's life by another person, for the sake of relieving the pain and suffering of the patient. Passive euthanasia is the cessation of medical assistance needed to prolong a patient's life, again performed for the sake of relieving pain and suffering. The conventional doctrine in medical ethics is that whereas passive euthanasia is sometimes morally permissible, active euthanasia never is. Rachels argues that the conventional doctrine faces serious objections, and cannot be correct.
Rachels raises two objections to the conventional doctrine. The first is that the purpose of euthanasia is to alleviate pain and suffering, and in many cases active euthanasia can serve this function much more efficiently than passive euthanasia. Thus, if a decision has been made to employ euthanasia, active euthanasia is preferable to passive euthanasia. Rachels's second objection is that the conventional doctrine leads to decisions about life and death being made on morally irrelevant grounds. For example, passive euthanasia is sometimes employed on infants born with Down's syndrome who would require a simple surgery to survive. Such infants are allowed to die not because they require surgery, but because they have Down's syndrome. The decision to euthanize such infants depends on the irrelevant fact that they require a simple operation.
The acceptance of the conventional doctrine is often grounded in the view that killing is intrinsically worse than letting die. Against this, Rachels imagines two cases that are exactly alike in every respect, except that one involves killing and the other involves letting die. In the first case, Smith drowns his young cousin to gain his inheritance. In the second case, Jones, like Smith, intends to kill his young cousin, but ends up (because of a slippery bath tub) merely watching him drown. Rachels claims that the two men behave equally wrongly, and that this shows there is no morally relevant distinction between killing and letting die. The distinction between killing and letting die thus cannot be used to support the conventional doctrine
-According to Rachels, many people accept the conventional doctrine because they believe:
Amnesia
is a condition marked by the loss of memories, such as facts, information, and experiences, caused by brain injury, disease, or psychological trauma.
Sudden Travel
The act of quickly moving or being moved from one location to another without prior planning or preparation.
Magnification
In cognitive psychology, it refers to a distortion where an individual exaggerates the negatives or minimizes the positives of a situation.
Beck
Beck commonly refers to Aaron T. Beck, a psychiatrist known for developing cognitive therapy, a foundation for cognitive-behavioral therapy.
Q1: Thomson claims that even though you ought
Q2: For Shue, questions of economic efficiency and
Q5: According to Nagel, our beliefs are always
Q12: Taylor defines meaninglessness as:<br>A) endless pointlessness.<br>B) endless
Q16: On Thomson's view, if a human being
Q19: Sinnott-Armstrong claims that moral sense theorists assimilate
Q20: Thomson thinks that in the Bystander at
Q27: Thomson reports that when confronted with Transplant,
Q28: Foot defines a positive duty as:<br>A) a
Q30: How does Foot think we should view