Question

How could you paraphrase or rewrite this one:

Important assumption: THE JUSTIFICATION for "letting die is to reduce harm & suffering of the patient. In situations for which passive euthanasia is permissible under this justification, there are no morally sound reason for prohibiting active euthanasia, and in some cases, active euthanasia is morally preferable to passive euthanasia (Rachels says that he can understand someone who opposes both active and passive euthanasia as immoral practices, but cannot make sense of approving of one and not the other.) The basis of the conventional doctrine is the distinction between "killing" and "letting die,"together with the assumption that the difference between killing and letting die must, by itself and apart from further consequences, constitute a genuine moral difference. Although most actual cases of killing are morally worse than most actual cases of letting die, we are more familiar with cases of killing (especially the terrible ones that are reported in the media), but we are less familiar with the details of letting die. This gap leads us to believe that killing is always worse.

Answer 1

Answer:Euthanasia is process which can provide relief to the patient by ending their life. It reduces harm and suffering of the patient. Active euthanasia which is morally prefera le to passive. The major conventional doctrine is the distinction between killing and letting die. There is a moral difference. As the killing are morally worse than most actual cases of eating die.