Active and Passive Euthanasia
This is an excerpt from the paper...
The word euthanasia literally means "good death" in the original Greek. In dictionary definitions, euthanasia refers to an easy or painless death. In modern times, the word has been most closely associated with the concept of mercy killing: allowing or helping someone to die who is suffering from an incurable illness. There are two types of euthanasia in actual practice. Active euthanasia involves taking an active role in causing the death of a suffering patient. Passive euthanasia, on the other hand, involves simply allowing a terminally ill patient to die by "withholding from the patient drugs, the use of life-support systems, or other life-prolonging medical care" (Heintze 39). This paper will consider the contrasting points of view regarding these two types of euthanasia and will argue in favor of the "good death" in strictly defined cases. Many people find the concept of passive euthanasia to be more acceptable than that of active euthanasia. Passive euthanasia is often seen as a humane alternative to keeping someone alive against his or her will. Modern medicine has allowed seriously ill patients to stay alive for long periods, thus raising concerns about such prolonging of life. Such factors as the suffering of terminally ill patients, the great amount of money involved in maintaining life-support systems, and the overall dignity of dying patients can all be used to justify the practice of passive euthanasia in specific cases. In 1975, the Supreme Court supp
. . .
ractice in order to eliminate sick or elderly relatives, "especially if they have money to bequeath" (Humphry 313). Still others argue that euthanasia should be avoided because a cure for a particular terminally ill patient may be discovered at any time (Weis 87).
The American medical profession as a whole has come to accept passive euthanasia in certain cases but is still strongly opposed to the practice of active euthanasia in any case. For example, a recent report in The New England Journal of Medicine agreed that a doctor should do "whatever is necessary to relieve pain and bring comfort. . . . adhering to the patient's wishes as much as possible" (Jet 14). This view conforms with statements by the American Medical Association regarding passive euthanasia. According to the AMA, there may be cases in which the prolonging of life is inhumane, and "under these circumstances, withholding or removing life supporting means is ethical provided that the normal care given an individual who is ill is not discontinued" (Heintze 44). The report of The New England Journal of Medicine, however, also expressed concern over doctors actually taking a role in causing the death of a patient as in the case of active euthanasia. Most member
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
, Medical Association, Catholic Church, Epps Jet, Hemlock Society, Journal Medicine, America Euthanasia, Supreme Court, Derek Humphry, According AMA, active euthanasia, passive euthanasia, national hemlock society, hemlock society, terminally ill, national hemlock, medical profession, ill patients, strictly defined, american medical, regulated law, terminally ill patients, england journal medicine, role causing death, report england journal,
Approximate Word count = 1663
Approximate Pages = 7 (250 words per page)
|
Customer Service
to Over
32,000 Professionally Written Papers!!!
