Euthanasia Flashcards
Voluntary Euthanasia
receives the patients consent
Nonvoluntary Euthanasia
does not receive patient consent
Active Euthanasia
directly causing death
Passive Euthanasia
indirectly causing (allowing to die/letting nature take its course)
Passive Voluntary
patient consent to allow die
Active Voluntary
patient consent to physician assisted suicide
Passive Nonvoluntary
See Karen Quinlan. Non-consenting allowing to die
Active Nonvoluntary
Non-consenting physician-assisted suicide
Logical Slippery Slope Argument
a fallacy will directly follow through the argument (total wrong)
Does it follow?
Practical Slippery Slope Argument
A correlation (could be right)
Does it often follow?
The Question of Euthanasia
Physician-Assisted Suicide
Do I have a right to ask a doctor to help me die?
Moral Agent
Someone who has the ability to make choices
The Philosopher’s Brief
a legal argument not compelling practitioners
famous philosophers added such as Dworkin, Jarvis Thomson, Nozick, Rawls, and More
Main Point: people have a right to self-determination, that the court upholds/has upheld.
-considered a slippery slope argument as it is based on past judgements
-critics ask at what point do we stop allowing government sanctioned death
Kant would say
physician-assisted suicide is immoral
Can something be legal but still immoral? And vice versa?
Yes
Least problematic stance
Voluntary passive euthanasia
Most problematic stance
involuntary active euthanasia
Rights can established by…. and equally be taken away by…
wherever/whoever grants them
Callahan presents…
The slippery slope argument
-once we allow assisted suicide, at what point does it end?
-the government could set out a eugenics ideology and kill/allow the killing of certain demographics
-how do you transfer the right to your life to someone else?
-how do you task the physician with such a choice?
-there is a difference between killing and letting die
-if we say yes to killing, abuse would run rampant
-there would be different levels allowing doctors to make decisions on quality of life
Lach’s argument on Euthanasia
-Callahan has taken it too far
-if physicians took off holds on drugs, people could just do it themselves
-we’ve already got doctors doing too much and making huge life-changing decisions
-if I can donate one kidney, why not both?
-the only difference is my loss
-but I gave up that willingly, so its mine to give up
-if medicine is about quality of life, then why can’t it be about poor quality as well?
Is there a difference between…
killing and letting die?
James Rachels: Active and Passive Euthanasia
-the doctrine of the AMA has arguments against it
-there is no difference between killing and letting die
-if both situations have equal intention, then certainly there is no difference in that case
-to let die in some instances can cause more suffering
-it can also cause suffering for those around
-causing suffering is contrary to the humanitarian impulse that says not to prolong life (allowing to die can be slow and painful, directly injecting can be a quick and painless death)
James Rachels example
Smith vs. Jones
-Smith and Jones both want to kill their nephew (a child) to get their inheritance
-Smith kills him in the bathtub by actively drowning him
-Jones lets him die by seeing him drowning and not doing anything
-these are obviously the same as the intentions were, but the only difference is their action/inaction
James Rachels appeal to practitioners/AMA
If a doctor lets a patient die for humane reasons, he is in the same moral position as if he had given the patient a lethal injection for humane reasons
-intention matters
-active is no worse than passive
-doctors should be concerned with their position on this issue