ipl-logo

James Rachels Views On Active Euthanasia

1221 Words5 Pages

James Rachels argues for both the use and moral significance of the distinction between active and passive euthanasia. Rachels believes since both forms of euthanasia come to the same outcome which results in death, active euthanasia is preferred to passive euthanasia. Rachels considers active euthanasia as a more humane way of ending suffering, because it brings a speedy end to the suffering. “Is there, he asks, any genuine moral difference between drowning a child and merely watching a child drown and doing nothing to save it (586)?” Rachels tries to attempt and show the fact difference between intentionally killing and letting someone die without any help, which also states that active euthanasia is not any different or morally wrong. “Killing of any kind is right and wrong depending on the intentions and circumstances in which it takes place; if the intentions and circumstances are of a …show more content…

However Rachels makes a strong argument against the doctrine, suppose a patient is dying of incurable cancer of the throat that is in terrible pain, who can no longer bare the suffering, he is certain to die within few days even if the treatment is continued, but the person does not want live those days in severe pain. He asks the doctor to put an end to it, and his family also supports him. If the doctor simply withholds the treatment, it

Show More
Related
288 Words | 2 Pages

The Constitution of the United States was written in 1787. Yet, the government it created couldn’t rule over people’s lives until one more step was taken. Each state had to vote to ratify1 , or approve of it. By 1789, eleven states had ratified the new government.

Read More
1412 Words | 6 Pages

To understand the ongoing debate about active and passive euthanasia, we must first look into Rachel’s

Read More
743 Words | 3 Pages

In the textbook, James Rachels, in some situations, feels that letting people die is morally worse than killing them. Rachel feels as if performing active euthanasia on a patient is okay. Active euthanasia allows the patient to not be in pain anymore and end their life knowing they do not have much longer in them. Say a patient has a disease that is incurable and is going to be in pain for the rest of their lives and does not want to be unable to partake in daily life activities they will not want to live anymore. The doctors giving them the correct medicine to take to die would be killing instead of not doing anything to try to save the patient.

Read More
1744 Words | 7 Pages

Dan Brock and James Rachel both make persuasive arguments regarding the controversial dilemma "Is Euthanasia morally permissible?". Of the two articles, however, Dan Brock's analysis of the key arguments and resolution of the points brought against euthanasia is the stronger argument compared to James Rachel's moral argument that active euthanasia is permissible because passive is. The main problem lying with euthanasia is simply put, do we as a society weigh actual life more than quality of life. Euthanasia however, should be, and is based upon quality of life, which is why it's morally permissible as a course of action. Dan Brock's Voluntary Active Euthanasia

Read More
428 Words | 2 Pages

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.

Read More
107 Words | 1 Pages

Rachel poses an argument against the conventional doctrine claiming that many cases where a patient is left to die are in fact worse than actually killing them. Because if the person is going to die in either case then why would it be morally permissible to let them slowly die? Either way, the patient is dead. Yet the conventional doctrine usually adds a requirement of suffering before dying. Rachel uses the example of the refusal of treatment to defective new-borns - and the subsequent death of the infant because of dehydration- in order to further prove that certain cases of letting die are actually worse than

Read More
1673 Words | 7 Pages

Rachels looks at the utilitarian argument which states that if an action increases happiness or decreases unhappiness it is morally acceptable, therefore killing a suffering patients, who requests to die, decreases their unhappiness and can be morally acceptable However, Rachels doesn’t see this argument as sound because happiness and unhappiness are not the only things to consider morally. To argue this Rachels uses the example that limiting religion may increase happiness, but that doesn’t make is morally acceptable because it denies people the ability to make their own decisions. Rachel then goes to create his argument, which uses both a mercy and utilitarian approach. The mercy argument justifies euthanasia when it puts an end to a patient’s agony and suffering. Rachels uses an example of a twenty eight year old man named Jack who suffers from terminal cancer.

Read More
636 Words | 3 Pages

However, the wording of this ethic has left room for interpretation. Many argue that prolonging the life of terminally-ill patients suffering pain constitutes doing harm and that ending the patient’s life would be the correct course of action. My personal view on euthanasia is that although it is a difficult choice, in principle a terminally ill patient has the choice to end his life in a timely and peaceful manner. However, the legislation required to write it into law must be drafted very carefully in a way that protects terminally ill patients from pressure and involuntary euthanasia, and must properly define the boundary between sick and terminally ill patients.

Read More
950 Words | 4 Pages

Rachels prefaces her two arguments by explaining that the single most powerful argument in favor of euthanasia is mercy. The concept of mercy and how it relates to euthanasia is quite simple. Terminally ill patients may suffer from pain and agony so terribly inconceivable that it is beyond the comprehension of those who have never experienced it. Mercy dictates that euthanasia is justified in that it ends suffering that is essentially worse than death. The first argument in regards to cases of justified killing functions under the ideological principles of utilitarianism.

Read More
1170 Words | 5 Pages

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

Read More
937 Words | 4 Pages

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.

Read More
1188 Words | 5 Pages

This essay suggest that active euthanasia should be supported. This essay elaborate the statement in three argument. Firstly, according to utilitarianism, active euthanasia can produces greatest net pleasure and happiness. Secondly, some philosopher Mary Anne Warren and Frances Kamm states that the practice of active euthanasia is kind and merciful, which allow people

Read More
1234 Words | 5 Pages

A controversial practice that invokes a debate over how beneficial its intentions are is the use of euthanasia. The argument switches between whether or not putting terminally ill patients to death with the assistance of a physician is justifiable and right. Legalizing the practice of euthanasia is a significant topic among many people in society, including doctors and nurses in the medical field, as it forces people to decide where to draw the line between relieving pain and simply killing. While some people see euthanasia as a way to helping a patient by eliminating their pain, it is completely rejected by others who see it as a method of killing.

Read More
1075 Words | 5 Pages

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

Read More
1149 Words | 5 Pages

The act of euthanasia, whether active or passive, is heavily obstructed in the medical field. Through medical ethics, the act of passive euthanasia is condoned by withholding treatment and thus, allowing the patient to die. Without any direct contact with the patient, the doctor is not considered as the cause of death. Thus, the medical field views passive euthanasia as of lesser and more permissible value in comparison to active euthanasia. In the statement made by the House of Delegates of the American Medical Association, they perceive this as contrary to mercy killing, as it is, the cessation of the employment of extraordinary means to prolong the life of the body when there is irrefutable evidence that biological death is imminent is the decision of the patient and/or his immediate family.

Read More

More about James Rachels Views On Active Euthanasia

Related Topics

Open Document