From James Rachels’ article on active and passive euthanasia, the writer introduced the AMA statement that talks about the two kinds of euthanasia. For passive euthanasia (letting someone die), it is morally permissible in some situation. But active euthanasia, which is physician-assisted death, is not morally permissible. Doctors can retain the treatments under many circumstances, and it is not wrong if the patient dies, but the doctors can’t "kill" the patient. This is known as Conventional Doctrine on Euthanasia. But the author James Rachels thinks passive euthanasia is not any better than active euthanasia.
The definition and difference between active euthanasia (killing) and passive euthanasia (letting die) are: active euthanasia is the patient or someone else made the
…show more content…
Passive euthanasia is under the same circumstance but the doctor retain the treatment that would keep patient’s life on purpose to let the patient die. The intention of passive euthanasia is to reduce harm and suffering of the patient. From the article James Rachels gave a thought experiment with Smith and Jones. The "Smith and Jones" case was about Smith and Jones would be able to get an inheritance if their 6-year-old cousin wasn’t in the way. Both of them decide to try to kill the cousin by themself, so they will be able to receive the inheritance. In one situation, Smith went after his cousin when the cousin was taking a shower and he drowned him in the bath to make the death look accidental. In another situation, Jones went after his cousin when the cousin was taking a shower, but after Jones walked into
Active and passive euthanasia has been a controversial topic for many decades. Medicine has become so advanced, even the most ill patients can be kept alive by artificial means. Active euthanasia is a deliberate action taken to end a person’s life, such as lethal dose of medication (Burkhardt & Nathaniel, 2014). Passive euthanasia is allowing a person to die by not intervening or stopping a treatment that is keeping them alive (Garrard, 2014). There are three main arguments within this issue; Firstly, in the healthcare setting, it is morally accepted to allow a patient to die but purposely killing a patient is not (Garrard, 2014). Secondly, some people believe there is no moral difference between passive and active euthanasia.
In “Active and Passive Euthanasia” Rachels demonstrates the similarities between passive and active euthanasia. He claims that if one is permissible, than the other must also be accessible to a patient who prefers that particular fate. Rachels spends the majority of the article arguing against the recommendations of the AMA. The AMA proposes that active euthanasia contradicts what the medical profession stands for. The AMA thinks that ending a person’s life is ethically wrong, yet believes that a competent patient has a right to choose passive euthanasia, meaning to refuse treatment in this case. Rachels makes four claims arguing against that AMA statement.
For instance, if a doctor gave an overdose of medication or gave a lethal injection this would be considered an active euthanasia. Passive Euthanasia is withholding something needed for life. Examples of this might be taking someone off of a feeding tube or life support and letting them die on their own.
Passive euthanasia can be defined as letting the patient die. The doctor takes the patient off their treatment and let the disease run through until they die. Active euthanasia is not legal today, and leans more toward killing the patient. The patient is ready to die so the doctor gives a lethal injection to speed up the process. Physician assisted suicide is almost a combination
Active euthanasia means that someone other than the patient commits an action with the intent to end a patient’s life, for example injecting a patient with a lethal dose. Voluntary euthanasia is when a patient asks for help in committing suicide or is refusing treatment. Non-voluntary euthanasia occurs when a patient is unable to make his or her own decisions such as: a person in a coma, an infant, a person who is senile, or a person who is mentally unstable. Physician assisted suicide is when a physician provides medication or other means to a patient with the understanding that the patient intends to commit suicide. (Should Euthanasia or Physician-Assisted Suicide Be Legal?,
Active versus passive euthanasia are two different, albeit arguably similar, ways in which an individual is helped to die. Passive euthanasia involves withholding life-saving medical treatment or removal from life
Passive Euthanasia, is the withhold, or removal of medical treatment brings about the death of a patient. For example a cancer patient stop chemotherapy. Active Euthanasia is the giving of a lethal treatment that brings about the death of a patient. James Rachels prefers active euthanasia since it's quick and ends the agony and misery of the person. With passive James Rachels, gives us extreme cases of patients and infants. Where they are days away from dying. Seeing them lay there in never ending pain, suffering until the very last minute. With these cases that Rachel's, provide it make us think differently how Active Euthanasia would be best for the patient or baby well being and end their agony. It's not an easy decision to make, but we have to think for the best for the patient.
The World Health Organization (WHO) Centre for Health Development (2004) explains that the term euthanasia comes from the Greek word for “good death”. The modern definition for euthanasia, according to the WHO, is “a deliberate act undertaken by one person with the intention of either painlessly putting to death or failing to prevent death from natural causes in cases of terminal illness or irreversible coma of another person” (WHO, 2004, p. 25). There are two types of euthanasia: active and passive. Active euthanasia involves an action that directly causes another’s death and can be voluntary or involuntary (Leming & Dickinson, 2016). Passive euthanasia involves the withholding of treatment from a terminally ill patient with the intended consequence of hastening death; this can involve refraining from nutrition, hydration, cardiopulmonary resuscitation or potentially life-saving
Within the scope of euthanasia are passive and active euthanasia. Passive euthanasia occurs when a patient refuses access to medical care or treatments, as is allowed by their freedom to legally choose whatever treatment they wish to receive or withhold (Stoyles et al 683). However, their decision to withhold from receiving treatments may result in a hastening of their death. Passive euthanasia is legal in the United States (Stoyles et al 683). However active euthanasia is illegal and is often misconstrued as being identical to physician-assisted suicide. Despite similarities, they are different in technical terms. Both euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide have the same intent and end result. However in euthanasia, the doctor is responsible for administering the lethal injection or other agent of death. In physician assisted suicide, the physician prescribes the patient a lethal injection which the patient will themselves administer (Boudreau et al 2). In both cases, the patient consents to the treatment, but only physician-assisted suicide is legal in certain states within the United States.
There are different forms in which suicide and euthanasia can take place. Suicide, for example, can be assisted, while euthanasia can be either passive or active. Passive euthanasia is when a physician will allow nature to take its course and
The difference between active and passive euthanasia is, active euthanasia is where a physician or a medical professional gives someone a lethal injection. Passive euthanasia is where either the doctors don't do something that keeps someone alive, or they stop doing something that is keeping them alive.
The differentiation of passive and active euthanasia is by the basis of the act and the intent of person and paitent. The act of passive euthansisa is defined as withholding treatment that is keeping the paitent alive, therefore allowing the paitent to die. Whereas, active euthanasia is to take direct measures to end the paitents life.
In James Rachel’s article Active and Passive Euthanasia, James provides the argument that there is no difference between active and passive euthanasia because in the end, either through inaction or action, it both results in death and there are no moral differences in ‘killing’ or ‘letting die’. Rachel provides several different arguments to support his case including a patient dying of terminal cancer, and two uncles and the death of their nephews.
According to Webster’s dictionary the term euthanasia Is defined as, “ the act or practice of killing someone who is very sick or injured in order to prevent any more suffering.” Now then there are two primary types of euthanasia according to Rachel’s. We have Passive Euthanasia in which the physician does nothing to bring about the death of the patient. By this physician doing nothing, ceasing treatment, the patient dies of the illness he already was diagnosed with. The patient dies of natural causes. The doctor is therefore letting the patient die. Then we have Active Euthanasia were the physician does something to bring about the death of the patient. The physician gives the terminally ill patient a lethal injection therefore now making the doctor the
In Euthanasia: Right to life vs right to die (Article One) researchers discussed various aspects of euthanasia from “active (introducing something to cause death) to passive (withholding treatment or supportive measures); voluntary (consent)