PHL275H1 Lecture Notes - Lecture 21: Involuntary Euthanasia, Voluntary Euthanasia, Down Syndrome
Document Summary
Reviewing ethics behind foreign aid (continued from lecture 20) Arthur says that any action is right, based on an ideal moral code: this moral code is what promotes the best consequences for human welfare and happiness, in general. However, arthur says the act itself, which derives from this said code, is privy to. The contingency of euthanasia explores the doing/enabling and intending/foreseeing distinction. Such distinctions make themselves evident in cases such as r vs. rodriquez, Latimer and carter: court declared the prohibition unconstitutional upon review of new evidence from different jurisdictions from around the world. Rachels asserts that the distinction between passive and active euthanasia is meaningless since they lead to the same end: he believes that there are no morally signi cant distinctions. Those who believe in this passive/active distinction appeal to the doing/enabling distinction: such belief makes it permissible to allow a patient to die, but never permissible to actively cause a patient"s death.
