Argument on Euthanasia

Satisfactory Essays
Euthanasia, a Greek word for “good death” refers to the practice of intentionally ending a life in order to relieve pain and suffering. Passive and active euthanasia is a very controversial topic that has been tackled by many people. Authors James Rachels and Thomas D. Sullivan make opposing arguments about the permissibility of both passive and active euthanasia. Using the case of a Down’s syndrome baby, James Rachels argues that passive euthanasia may be in some cases morally indistinguishable from active euthanasia and in other cases even worse. On the contrary, Thomas D. Sullivan makes a case against Rachels claims by arguing that the real distinction steams from the traditional view, which is the intentional termination of human life is impermissible regardless of whether this goal is brought about by action or inaction. He argues that when one withholds means to sustain life is equal to killing. Although, instead of arguing about the distinctions of Euthanasia many people base their arguments on whether or not Euthanasia as a whole should be permissible in society. There is a grave distinction between passive and active euthanasia or in other words killing and letting die. Passive and Active Euthanasia have separate contributions but they can both in specific cases be not only permissible but helpful to a patient. Passive euthanasia is generally more morally permissible than active euthanasia although, under certain circumstances one may view active euthanasia permissibly as well. Although for different reasons John Rachels and Thomas D. Sullivan both conclude that Passive and Active Euthanasia are impermissible. When one thinks of “killing” it is thought of as a definite action taking place that results in death. While in... ... middle of paper ... ...sed to the questions brought forth earlier, some people will argue yes. Those appose to Euthanasia may argue that it is a rejection of the importance and value of human life. Thus, suggesting that the doing or not doing to prolong one’s life somehow shows that you value life less. That is not necessarily true. For euthanasia to even be considered means that the situation as has already reached extremes. As described earlier the majority of the cases that calls for the option of euthanasia leave the ill individual either in pain or in a worsen state of being. Refusing to take the chance of giving an individual a treatment that could possibly cause more damage is in no way showing that one values life any less. Passive euthanasia is actually valuing life to let nature run its course without your interference. Is it not human nature for everyone to at some point die?
Get Access