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
-What is the "conventional doctrine" regarding active and passive euthanasia? What reasons are typically given in support of this view? Do you think they are good reasons? Why or why not?
Equity Method
An accounting technique used to record investments in other companies, where the investment is initially recorded at cost and adjusted thereafter for the investor's share of the investee's profit or losses.
Dividends
Payments made by a corporation to its shareholder members, usually derived from the company's profits.
Fair Value Enterprise Method
A valuation approach that estimates the value of an entire enterprise based on the fair value of its assets and liabilities.
Equity Method
An accounting technique used by companies to record their investments in other companies, based on the equity or ownership stake in those companies.
Q3: According to Marquis, it is typically immoral
Q3: What is the difference between internalist and
Q8: Wolf-Devine thinks that affirmative action has several
Q15: Rachels argues that if we have a
Q19: What is the difference between a categorical
Q20: One principal contributing cause of endangering species
Q21: According to Arpaly, an agent can be
Q24: According to Sinnott-Armstrong, many of our moral
Q30: External reasons are reasons that exist regardless
Q30: Anscombe criticizes Butler on the grounds that:<br>A)