Name
Instructor
Course
Date
Active and Passive Euthanasia
The author seeks to offer the difference between active and passive euthanasia. Initially, the author elucidates that the difference between these two euthanasia methods is believed to be vital in medical ethics. The argument is that it is allowed, at least in some circumstances, to allow patient to die through withholding treatment (300). However, it is not permissible to take any direct action structured to take a patient’s life. The author stresses that a rigid case can be developed against such doctrine, whereby he designs arguments and request physicians to their views on active and passive euthanasia. The author’s prime argument is that the process of doctors allowing a patient to die can be slow and painful while giving them a lethal injection can be painless and quick.
Moreover, the author offers reasons why individuals believe that there is a moral distinction between action and passive euthanasia. Notably, he posits that doctors and other people think that letting a person die is morally better than killing them. This is because individuals think that physicians let die while bad people kill. Nevertheless, there is not intrinsic to the killing, which is worse the letting someone die. It is also important to note that it is wrong to say that doctors do nothing in passive euthanasia. Arguably, they do something, that is, to let someone die (303). Letting someone die is a form of action and a decision taken by the doctor. Therefore, such a decision is subject to moral appraisal, similar to the decision of killing the patient. Overall, under all circumstances, if death is deemed preferable, bringing death, regardless of the method, is not bad anymore. Hence, it is hard to distinguish between passive and active euthanasia philosophically.
Work Cited
Vaughn, Lewis. Doing ethics: Moral reasoning and contemporary issues. WW Norton & Company, 2019.