PHIL 335 Lecture Notes - Lecture 9: Lifesaving, Sue Rodriguez, Involuntary Euthanasia
3 Jun 2018
School
Department
Course
Professor
Unit 9
1.
Do you think there is a defensible moral difference between killing and letting die (or
between action and omission)?
I do believe that there is a moral difference between killing someone else and letting them die.
First, when killing someone, there was no guarantee that they would have died so you are
actively taking away their life. When you simply let them die, it is up to nature to determine
when that patient or individual will lose their life. Second, when you choose to kill another
person, you are evaluating the value of their life and determining for them that their life does not
have value. It may have value to them, but killing them involves ignoring that value. When you
let someone die, there is no value judgement required.
On a different note, killing someone can be more merciful than simply allowing
someone to die. If someone is in a large amount of pain, killing them may be the only option to
relieve their suffering. If you allow them to just die, they could suffer for days, months, and even
years longer in an unbearable state. If you cannot offer them complete reliable pain control
through some other method, killing them may be more merciful than allowing them to live in
suffering. This also applies if the individual is begging to die because of their pain.
1. Do you think there is a defensible moral difference between active voluntary euthanasia
and physician-assisted suicide?
I do not really believe that there is a moral difference between active voluntary euthanasia and
physician-assisted suicide. Active voluntary euthanasia occurs when the patient wishes to die and
the physician takes action (using by lethal injection) to end their life. It is usually “quick,
painless, and desired by the patient” (Robert, 2013, Unit 9). The key thing to note is that the
doctor is essential in the patient’s death and they are delivering the death by giving an injection.
On the other hand, physician-assisted suicide occurs when the doctor provides the patient with a
life-ending dose of painkillers and the patient takes them by their own hand. In this way, it is still
suicide even though the doctor provides the medication.
Why do I not believe there is a moral difference? In either scenario, the patient has requested to
die and the doctor provides them with the means to do so. The doctor must have agreed that the
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Document Summary
I do believe that there is a moral difference between killing someone else and letting them die. First, when killing someone, there was no guarantee that they would have died so you are actively taking away their life. When you simply let them die, it is up to nature to determine when that patient or individual will lose their life. Second, when you choose to kill another person, you are evaluating the value of their life and determining for them that their life does not have value. It may have value to them, but killing them involves ignoring that value. When you let someone die, there is no value judgement required. On a different note, killing someone can be more merciful than simply allowing someone to die. If someone is in a large amount of pain, killing them may be the only option to relieve their suffering.
