Active And Passive Euthanasia Analysis

1242 Words5 Pages
Euthanasia, a sensitive topic for most; some are for it, some are against it. The issue that is presented in James Rachel’s “Active and Passive Euthanasia” is an attempt to determine if assisted death is morally acceptable or flat out immoral.This controversial topic is a subject that comes up frequently in the medical field. Should one be able to self inflict death? Some say it is morally wrong while others believe otherwise. I am here to argue in favor of Euthanasia!

However, before teaming up with James Rachel and arguing in favor of Euthanasia, it is best that you, the reader, understand the difference between Active and Passive Euthanasia. First and for most, there is a significant gap between these two classifications of Euthanasia.
…show more content…
The second reason is that the duty of not killing someone is dischargeable. Third, if we do not succeed in saving a dying individual, we essentially leave open the possibility that someone else might come along and save them. Lastly, some philosophers consistently believe that letting someone die is not as bad as killing because of the difference in the intention behind the two kinds of actions (James Rachel, Killing and Letting Die). Rachel’s argument towards both Active Euthanasia and Passive Euthanasia is accurate in the sense that Active Euthanasia is morally wrong and in some cases Passive Euthanasia is acceptable. Let’s take the scenario of the patient who is dying of incurable cancer of the throat and is in terrible pain. Although this type of cancer is incurable, there is still the slightest of chances that the individual’s body will reject the cancer and form healthy cells that will in turn fight against the cancer on its own. But since this is not…show more content…
One who is against Euthanasia may feel that although an individual may want to end their life due to terminal suffering, as mentioned before, even at the slightest of chances the individual may have a chance of healing and getting better with continuous treatment. There are some cases in which individual’s immune systems fight back and come back stronger and in a sense is clean of any infection. Another view is that, regardless of the process, assisted or unassisted, if the result is one’s death, the act is immoral. Last but not least, one who feels strongly against Euthanasia would argue that even Passive Euthanasia would lead to Active Euthanasia. Take the same part of the passage that I mentioned in the beginning. If the doctor refrained from providing treatment to the cancer patient then the suffering of the patient would increase, which would then take the case from being referred to as Passive Euthanasia to then being classified as Active Euthanasia. Let it be known that this does not overlook any crucial distinctions, but instead pays attention to each detail to the contrary view presented above. With that being said, since all details are paid close attention to, this argument against Euthanasia does not move too quickly, because as mentioned all possible details and claims are
Open Document