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 there is no moral difference between active and passive euthanasia, considered in themselves.
Mexican American
Individuals in the United States who have Mexican ancestry, constituting a significant ethnic group with its own unique cultural, historical, and social experiences.
Native American
The indigenous peoples of the Americas, including various tribes, cultures, and languages existing prior to European colonization.
Distinct Cultures
The unique characteristics, traditions, languages, and practices that define different groups of people and distinguish them from one another.
Equal Rights Amendment
A proposed amendment to the United States Constitution designed to guarantee equal legal rights for all American citizens regardless of sex.
Q4: Rachels argues that if someone desires the
Q8: What are some of the practical implications
Q12: According to Nagel, when it comes to
Q18: According to Shue, wealthy industrialized countries should
Q19: Thomson claims that in cases of abortion,
Q21: According to the conventional doctrine, active euthanasia
Q22: Wolf claims we must resort to intuition
Q22: Nagel claims that if people can be
Q24: Midgley argues that it is possible to
Q26: Sinnott-Armstrong argues that the following illusions might