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
-Explain Rachels's example of infants with Down's syndrome that require intestinal surgery. What conclusions does Rachels draw from this example? Do you agree with him?
Transsexual
An individual who experiences a gender identity that is incongruent with their assigned sex at birth and may seek to transition physically and legally to the gender with which they identify.
Bodily Appearance
The physical form, look, or outward aspect of a person's body, including attributes such as height, shape, and facial features.
Surgery
A branch of medicine that involves the manual and instrumental techniques to treat diseases, injuries, or deformities by incision or removal of body tissues and organs.
Learning Theorists
Psychologists who study and develop theories about how learning occurs, focusing on the processes of acquiring, modifying, and reinforcing knowledge, beliefs, behaviors, and skills.
Q2: Rachels claims that most actual cases of
Q5: Wolf-Devine claims that affirmative action has the
Q8: Thomson claims that the right to life
Q12: According to Hanson, white men have not
Q16: According to Herman's interpretation of Kant, an
Q20: According to externalist theories of ethics:<br>A) moral
Q27: The problem of pollution has a relatively
Q29: Nagel claims that prior to reflection, it
Q30: According to Wolf-Devine, affirmative action does nothing
Q32: According to Wolf-Devine, the number of women