Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
¶ … Active and Passive Euthanasia, by James Rachels. Specifically, it will explain his arguments that active euthanasia is morally permissible, and the extent to which his arguments illustrate Kantian and utilitarian considerations.
ACTIVE AND PASSIVE EUTHANASIA
Rachels is an advocate of physician-assisted suicide, or euthanasia, and he wants to convince the American Medical Association (AMA) to change their definition of euthanasia, allowing doctors to allow terminally ill patients with no hope of recovery to be euthanized. His arguments for euthanasia are effective and compelling, and though directed at physicians, they are of interest to anyone thinking about euthanasia for themselves or a loved one. Rachels discusses the differences between "killing and letting die" (Rachels 561), and discusses specific cases where allowing the patient to simply die without further treatment could actually prolong their life and their suffering. "Part of my point is that the process of the 'allowed to die' can be relatively slow and painful, whereas...
In fact, his arguments seem so logical; it is difficult to understand why euthanasia is not already used in terminal and the worst cases.
Passive euthanasia (letting someone die) is a relatively common occurrence in the United States today. Families tell doctors their loved one does not want to be kept on life support, or does not want to suffer endlessly and doctors remove all treatment. Yet, the same doctor cannot inject the patient with a lethal injection to end their misery, that would be "killing," and it is against the morals of many, and against AMA rules.
Morally, Rachels' arguments are part legality and part philosophy. The Kantian philosophy of benevolence certainly seems to apply here to Rachels' discussion. "Kant's contention that the only good thing is a good will, which is what the New Testament means by love, goes necessarily with his second maxim. Whatever is 'benevolent' is right; whatever is 'malevolent' is wrong" (Fletcher 14). If…
References
Rachels, James. "Active and passive Euthanasia." PLEASE ADD BOOK HERE.
A www.questia.com/PageManagerHTMLMediator.qst?action=openPageViewer&docId=85664345"Fletcher, Joseph. Moral Responsibility: Situation Ethics at Work. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1967.
Euthanasia (active and Passive) A Moral Philosophy Paper Euthanasia is the practice of ending a person's life for the sole purpose of relieving the person's body from excruciating pain and suffering due to an incurable disease. The term euthanasia is often referred as mercy killing or the 'good death' as derived from the Greek. Euthanasia can be classified into four categories. In active euthanasia, a person's life is terminated by a doctor
Passive Euthanasia: a comparative analysis of Judaic and Catholic points-of-View. Euthanasia is essentially the practice of "mercifully ending a person's life in order to release the person from an incurable disease, intolerable suffering, or undignified death." (Euthanasia) The term euthanasia is derived from the Greek words 'eu' and 'thanatos' which means "good death." The term has most commonly been referred to in relation to intentional mercy killings. (ibid) In other words,
136). A major factor underlying whether active or passive euthanasia is legal is whether the doctor intends to kill the patient or not (Lewis, 2009, p. 126). Rachels hits on the intent piece in one of his constructed examples, "Rather, the other factors - the murderer's motive of personal gain, for example, contrasted with the doctor's humanitarian motivation -account for different reactions to the different cases." The Colombian Constitutional Court
active and passive euthanasia. Why does James Rachels think there is no moral difference between them? Active euthanasia is the "mercy killing" of a life to prevent further suffering; passive euthanasia is deliberately allowing that life to die of "natural" causes. James Rachels believes there is no moral difference between active and passive euthanasia for a few reasons. First, in many cases where passive euthanasia is allowed (meaning it has
Euthanasia is a Moral, Ethical, and Proper Social Policy When it is carried out with a competent physician in attendance and appropriate family members understand the decision and the desire of the ill person -- or there has been a written request by the infirmed person that a doctor-assisted death is what she or he desired -- euthanasia is a moral, ethical and proper policy. It offers a merciful end to
The findings reveal that the pain is unbearable yet the patients tend to become immune from it, or at least surrender to it. The purpose of this article as it relates to the topic of euthanasia is that one popular argument for the legalization of euthanasia is that it is inhumane to let a patient suffer. This study attempts to validate this argument by showing what exactly the patient