James Rachels Arguments About The Euthanasia Debate

Conclusion I have argued that even though a physician killing an untreatable patient and a physician letting a patient die upon their request are both morally justifiable, the distinction between the two regarding the morality of physician assisted suicide is important because they are both justified differently. I have presented two counter arguments based on consequentialism, and argued that both of them untrue. A physician killing an untreatable patient upon their request and letting an untreatable patient die upon their request are both justifiable aspects of physician assisted suicide, and therefore it is not an important distinction to make regarding the moral permissibility of physician assisted suicide. However, it is an important

Physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia has been one of the most debated subjects in the past years. There are resilient advocates on both sides of the debate for and against physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia. Advocates of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide believe it is a person ’s right to die when faced with terminal illness rather than suffer through to an unpleasant demise. Whereas, opponents contend that euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide is not only equivalent of murder, but it is ethically and morally incorrect.

Physician assisted suicide and/or Euthanasia is very controversial involving the topic of ethics. In ethics, when determining what is deemed substantially right or wrong, there is tremendous difficulty in finding a true black or white. To better explain, “physician assisted suicide is defined as the deliberate termination of a patient’s life by administering a lethal drug through a direct or indirect help from a physician” (Youngman, 2013). Throughout the text, what will be examined is assisted suicide influenced by the German philosopher, Immanuel Kant. Since almost every ethical issue arises when a matter concerning two remarkably different possibilities conflict with one another, the theory of Immanuel Kant may be able to find a definitive solution to this concerning ethical issue pertaining to euthanasia and/or physician assisted suicide.

In this article author James Rachels highlights the true meaning along with pros and cons of what active and passive euthanasia are. Since the very beginning the author ensures that the reader can understand the difference between these two concepts. He uses multiple examples and facts to support his idea. For example, he mentions that active euthanasia is at times more humane than that of passive euthanasia. His thought regarding this is that, with active euthanasia the person is less prone to having a painful death rather than just letting a person go through the passive channel and just letting that person suffer and die with agony.

The possible legalization of euthanasia can cause a great disturbance in how people view life and death and the simplicity of how they would treat it. "There are many fairly severely handicapped people for whom a simple, affectionate life is possible." (Foot, p. 94) As demonstrated, the decision of terminating a person 's life is a very fragile and difficult one, emotionally and mentally. Nevertheless, it’s a choice we can make if it is passive euthanasia being expressed.

In the dialogue between Lindsay and Alex, Alex argues that active euthanasia fundamentally goes against its own principles of dying with dignity and should not be allowed, following Lindsay’s anecdote of a woman utilizing active euthanasia to “die with dignity”. However, the arguments that Alex uses to defend his points, an argument from nature and an argument from dignity, have been discussed and criticized, with many in the philosophical literature arguing that active euthanasia promotes and shows respect for a patient’s dignity and self-determination, rather than undermining it. In this paper, I will reconstruct Alex’s arguments in a more structured form and show that premises behind his arguments are false, rendering his argument unsound.

Assisted Suicide: Is it compassionate to permit assisted Suicide? 80 percent of assisted suicides are not chosen by the patient(Balkin 1). “Instead of embracing PAS [Physician Assisted Suicide], we should respond to suffering with true compassion” (Anderson 1). Assisted suicide is when doctors prescribe a lethal medicine called euthanasia to a patient. They do this because patients, or someone choosing assisted suicide for the patient, can see no other options but death.

Euthanasia is the deliberate killing under the impulse of compassion in order to relieve the physical pain of a person suffering (Diaconescu 2012, p.474). According to Thiroux and Krasemann, (2012) Euthanasia has existed in human history from ancient’s times, although within twentieth century it is now being considered, as a type of “mercy killing”, in which is a form of murder within most countries of the world. Healey (1997) stated “euthanasia always involves an intention to kill” ethical debates on the topic continue to be an ongoing issue, this essay will distinguish the unethical notions of euthanasia by considering and implementing the theoretical concepts of the divine command theory and Rule utilitarianism theory. Divine Command Theory emphasises on the rules for determining one’s actions and motives, Christianity for example, the command of ‘thou shalt not kill’ reflects on the sanctity of life, therefore

The most commonly held belief in relation to moral standing for euthanasia is that killing, active euthanasia, is always worse than letting die, passive euthanasia (Buckles, 2018). However, in some circumstances,

The traditional doctrine establishes that there is a moral difference between the two, thus allowing passive euthanasia while forbidding active euthanasia. However, in “Active and Passive Euthanasia”, philosopher James Rachels, argues

Euthanasia is usually used to refer to active euthanasia, and in this sense, euthanasia is usually considered to be criminal homicide, but voluntary, passive euthanasia is widely non-criminal. Voluntary Euthanasia is conducted with the consent of the patient while Involuntary Euthanasia is conducted against the will of the patient. Beginning with the philosophical aspects of euthanasia we must first understand the importance of the sanctity of life. Human life is sacred because God made humankind in His own image, and that each individual human

In this case, healthcare professionals actively participate in the patient death. According to ethical principles, healthcare professionals should do good and do no harm for patients. Therefore, assisting in her death violates the principle of nonmaleficence. In addition, active euthanasia defines as an intentional act of ending patients lives, whether or not the dying patients request. Four states, Oregon, Washington, Vermont, and Montana have approved laws of the practice of physician-assisted suicide.

The major difference between active and passive euthanasia is that active euthanasia requires another person, "an outsider" to commit the act of murder in a sense by giving the patient medication to speed up their impending death. Whereas passive euthanasia is the process of withholding medication or other requirements that could potentially save a person, such as withholding a surgery needed in order to survive or something as simple as food per patients request. Both of these procedures end in the same result, the death of the patient, with their consent to do so. Many people have the moral issue that doctors and health care providers are playing God and allowing patients to "commit suicide" when it's illegal for a reason. However, I personally believe

In a few nations there is a divisive open discussion over the ethical, moral, and legitimate issues of euthanasia. The individuals who are against euthanasia may contend for the holiness of life, while defenders of euthanasia rights accentuate mitigating enduring, substantial respectability, determination toward oneself, and individual autonomy. Jurisdictions where euthanasia or supported suicide is legitimate incorporate the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Switzerland, Estonia, Albania, and the US states of Washington. CLASSIFICATION OF EUTHANASIA Euthanasia may be characterized consistent with if an individual

If we just look at the case from different angles, we would probably see how beneficial it is, in this traumatic life. Perhaps life might seem to be hard for us sometimes but there are people out there who really are suffering and desperately need to die. It is the latter prohibitive form that condemns active euthanasia" Although the opponents' statement might be right but in some critical cases, it is does not work. Euthanasia is giving people the rest that they desperately need.