The Morality of Euthanasia
• Active euthanasia —Performing an action
that directly causes someone to die
(“mercy killing”).
• Passive euthanasia —Allowing someone
to die by not performing some lifesustaining action.
The Morality of Euthanasia
• Voluntary euthanasia —Euthanasia
requested or agreed to by the patient.
• Nonvoluntary euthanasia —Euthanasia
requested by persons other than the
patient, when the patient cannot request it
herself and her wishes are unknown.
The Morality of Euthanasia
• Passive euthanasia (both voluntary and
nonvoluntary) is legal.
• The strongest argument for active
voluntary euthanasia is derived from the
principle of autonomy.
• Those who oppose euthanasia often draw
a sharp distinction between killing and
letting die.
The Morality of Euthanasia
 Some argue against active voluntary
euthanasia by advancing a distinction between
intending someone’s death and not intending but
foreseeing it.
 The mere possibility of abuses arising from
allowing euthanasia or assisted suicide is in
itself not a good reason to ban the practice.
 Some maintain that there is no morally
significant difference between mercifully killing a
patient and mercifully letting a patient die.
The Morality of Euthanasia
Voluntary Active Euthanasia —Dan W. Brock
 The possible good consequences of
establishing a public policy of permitting
voluntary active euthanasia outweigh the
bad.
 The distinction between killing and allowing
to die is confused.
The Morality of Euthanasia
The Wrongfulness of Euthanasia —J. GayWilliams
•
•
Active euthanasia is inherently wrong
because the action conflicts with natural
law.
The practice will lead to widespread
abuse.
The Morality of Euthanasia
Active and Passive Euthanasia —James Rachels
•
There is no morally significant difference
between killing and letting die.
•
To doctors: Do not write the traditional
distinction between active and passive
euthanasia into official statements of
medical ethics.