Identify The Moral Difference Between Active And Passive Euthanasia

The purpose of this essay is to identify the moral distinction that lies between active and passive euthanasia. Through the analysis of the moral ethics, it is believed that James Rachels is wrong to argue that there is no moral difference between the two types of euthanasia. The moral difference is evaluated through the principle cause, intent and motive of active and passive euthanasia, which clearly distinguishes these two actions apart. The principle cause of passive euthanasia is the illness itself in comparison to the physician directly causing death through the prescription of drugs in active euthanasia. The intent in active euthanasia is to kill, whereas passive euthanasia does not intend for the patient to die. In active euthanasia, the motive is to kill someone. However, the motive is different for passive euthanasia. The motivation is supported by the respect for the patient’s autonomy and right to self-determination, including how they want to end their lives. This essay examines the perception of the principle cause, intent, and motive to effectively identify the moral difference between the act of killing and the letting someone die by withholding treatment at the request of the patient. As a result, the moral difference is define that

In passive euthanasia, it is the disease or illness itself, which causes the death of the patient. In essence, it is not our inaction that cause the patient to die, rather, it is the underlying factors of his/her illness that leads to death. However, in active euthanasia, the physician’s action of prescribing or injecting a lethal drug is the agent that directly causes the patient to die. Although the outcome is similar in both cases, the cause of death is different in respect that one is murder and the other is honoring the patient’s wishes in regards how they want to end their