The Morality of Euthanasia

1. 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 life-sustaining action.

2. 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.

3. 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.

4. 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.

5. 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.

6. The Morality of Euthanasia The Wrongfulness of Euthanasia —J. Gay-Williams • Active euthanasia is inherently wrong because the action conflicts with natural law. • The practice will lead to widespread abuse.

7. 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.