Question

From Active and Passive Euthanasia by James Rachels, What are the 4 reasons why James Rachels feels that the statement by the American Medical Association about euthanasia is unsound?

From The Intentional Termination of Life by Bonnie Steinbock, Why does Steinbock disagree with Rachels?

Answer 1

American medical Association permitted passive euthanasia and banned active euthanasia. Four important reasons why James Rachel feels that the statement by the American Medical Association about Euthanasia is unsound are as below:

1)   Rachels argues that the policy of American Medical Association (AMA) concerning Euthanasia lacks consistency and the decisions are being taken on irrelevant grounds.
2)   Rachels argues that the AMA’s permission for passive euthanasia and not allowing active Euthanasia is morally irrelevant. He argues that in cases where the patient is in great suffering and has no hope to live, the active euthanasia is more humane than positive euthanasia.
3)   Rachels also argues that AMA’s distinction between active euthanasia (killing) and passive euthanasia (letting die) is morally meaningless. Both the approaches have their own limitations and both pose ethical questions.
4)   Rachels also argues that the arguments in the favor of the AMA’s statement on euthanasia are invalid because similar arguments can be used in favor of active euthanasia.

     Steinbock disagrees with Rachel’s critique of AMA’s argument. Steinbock thinks that Rachels misunderstood the policy of AMA. She explains that AMA doesn’t endorse any form of euthanasia. It only permits withholding treatment when the patient has given consent, and therefore the question of going for active or passive euthanasia doesn’t come into practice because the patient has right to both ask for or to refuse the treatment. Therefore Steinbock finds the AMA’s policy as morally acceptable because everything is in accord with patients consent and doctor does not intentionally terminate the patient’s life unlike in Euthanasia .