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
-Rachels claims that in almost all cases, active euthanasia leads to less suffering than active euthanasia.
Olfaction
The sense of smell, a chemical sense that detects odors or scents through sensory organs in the nose.
Alveolar Process
Part of the jawbone that contains the sockets (alveoli) for teeth.
Crista Galli
A vertical projection of the ethmoid bone in the skull, serving as the point of attachment for membranes dividing the nasal cavity.
Supraorbital Foramen
An opening or notch in the frontal bone of the skull, above the eye orbit, through which the supraorbital nerve and vessels pass.
Q2: In Thomson's view, the right to life
Q6: There are social disadvantages and injustices individuals
Q10: Sinnott-Armstrong claims that the following principle explains
Q11: Acid rain threatens not only the natural
Q11: According to Shue, progressive rates of contribution
Q12: Rachels claims that moral skeptics attack the
Q12: Thomson argues that the following fact explains
Q24: According to Thomson, one may let five
Q29: Rachels claims that there is no moral
Q29: According to the first argument Wolf-Devine examines,