Voluntary Active Euthanasia: Ethics, Autonomy, and Well-Being
This paper examines Dan Brock's philosophical defense of voluntary active euthanasia as presented in his 1992 essay in The Hastings Center Report. The analysis covers two core ethical values Brock identifies — individual self-determination and individual well-being — and how these values support a person's right to choose the manner of their death. The paper also explores the distinction between killing and allowing to die, as well as Brock's responses to three major objections: the erosion of physician trust, the adequacy of palliative care, and the risk that voluntary euthanasia may slide toward nonvoluntary forms. Evidence from the Netherlands is cited to address concerns about abuse and the availability of alternative care.
- Introduction: The Ethical Foundation of Voluntary Active Euthanasia: Brock's two core values supporting euthanasia
- Self-Determination and Individual Well-Being: Autonomy and well-being as justifications for euthanasia
- Killing Versus Allowing to Die: Distinction between actively killing and letting die
- Physician Trust and the Moral Center of Medicine: Brock defends physician role in voluntary euthanasia
- Care for Dying Patients and the Fear of Erosion: Netherlands data on euthanasia rates and care access
- The Risk of Nonvoluntary Euthanasia: Slippery slope objection and Brock's rebuttal
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper follows Brock's argument closely and systematically, addressing each major point in sequence, which allows the reader to trace the philosophical reasoning without confusion.
- It uses direct quotation from Brock to anchor its claims, demonstrating proper use of primary source evidence in a philosophy-adjacent ethics paper.
- The numbered and lettered structure mirrors the multi-part assignment format, making it easy to identify how each objection is addressed and how Brock responds.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates philosophical exposition and objection-response analysis. Rather than simply summarizing Brock's position, it engages with the internal structure of his argument — identifying the foundational values he invokes, examining his treatment of a difficult conceptual distinction (killing vs. allowing to die), and then evaluating his responses to three specific counterarguments. This technique shows understanding of how ethical arguments are constructed and defended.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens by identifying the two core values Brock uses to justify voluntary active euthanasia. It then turns to the killing/allowing-to-die distinction, where Brock's reasoning is most nuanced. The final section addresses three discrete objections — physician trust, patient care costs, and the slippery slope to nonvoluntary euthanasia — in labeled subsections. This mirrors the classic argumentative structure: premise, complication, defense against objections.
Introduction: The Ethical Foundation of Voluntary Active Euthanasia
In his 1992 essay, Dan Brock presents the central ethical argument for voluntary active euthanasia. He identifies two fundamental ethical values that support it and explains how those values create a basis for concluding that this decision can legitimately be made — provided it is made by the person who intends to die.
These values are individual self-determination, or autonomy, and individual well-being. Brock defines self-determination as it bears on euthanasia in the following way: "By self-determination as it bears on euthanasia, I mean people's interest in making important decisions about their lives according to their own values or conceptions of a good life, and in being left free to act on those decisions" (Brock, 1992, p. 10).
References
Brock, D. (1992). Voluntary active euthanasia. The Hastings Center Report, 22(2), 10. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3562560
Young, R. (1996). Voluntary euthanasia. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved April 11, 2016, from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/euthanasia-voluntary/
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.