The topic of euthanasia has been one which has been controversial for many years. Euthanasia can be a topic of many arguments and becomes significantly more complicated when being referred to as passive or active euthanasia. Many people have chosen sides in the discussion of euthanasia not just being for or against but believing that it is okay solely when it is done slowly and indirectly this is known as passive euthanasia instead of just impulsively known as active euthanasia. The importance of this essay is to display that there is no difference between the two when it comes to the measure of morality. Passive or active, euthanasia is still the allowance of a patient’s death whether immediate or unhurried the end result remains the same therefore the difference in …show more content…
With there being no emphasis between the ways it may be done but only on the condition of the patient active euthanasia and passive euthanasia weigh equally morally. Killing is killing whether it is taking a patient off of life support or giving them an injection. If the end result is the death of the patient the person making the decision to carry out the action should not be deemed more or less moral for the way the act was conveyed. In addition not doing something to help someone is weighed equally as to actually physically hurting someone. Viewing it in a form of the example of choking someone or watching someone choke on something and purposely doing nothing so they can die you are still killing someone there was room in both situations for you to allow the person to live. Some may argue that it is worse to choke than to stand around and do nothing this may be true in a courtroom but from a moral aspect there can be no difference because your intentions in both situation was to allow the person to