There is no difference between passive and active euthanasia because the two are both an action even though active euthanasia is a physical action, passive is a mental action because u made the decision to not prevent the death. For example a man who want to have assisted suicide he uses a agency called compassion and choices who give advice to the man who wants assisted suicide. this is considered an action because without her help he would not be able to commit this.
There is a difference because the man who wanted to commit assisted suicide decided to do that on his own. Even though he asked for help from the compassion and choices agency the women only gave him advice. He used his own freedom to take her advice. According James Rachels argument about active and passive euthanasia, one in 600 children are born with down syndrome in the United States. Some are born with congenital defects and have to undergo operations to live. The parent has a right to either let there child die or live. If the parent's make the decision not to let the child live the doctor's job is to obey the parent's decision which proves that passive and active euthanasia are different.
What you have pointed out to me basically proves what my point on why i see passive and active euthanasia are the same because even though the doctor had to obey the parents decision to let the child die then that would be and action once again from the parents to not help their child. why would a parent want to let their child not live and see what can happen or if there is a cure to this disease. the parents should not have that option of letting the child go and the doctor's job is to try their best to keep the child alive. Both passive and active euthanasia have the same outcome either way it is being done.
The parents should have a choice to let there child die or live. There is a difference if the child lives or dies because even though the child may not live a normal life the child still has every right to live. If the parents decide to let the child die the doctor has no right to go against the parents wishes. The doctor is there just to do whats best for the patient. If the parent believes that the child will not have a normal life if he or she lives thats the parents right to decide.
Due the fact that the doctor and the parent decided to not help this child live and have the child die results in them committing murder and wouldn't have made a difference if they was to physically kill the child right away. the only way there can be a difference would be if there was nothing they would be able to do, but the fact that they made a decision result in them still committing a mental action. There is no distinction between passive and active euthanasia because both the parent and the doctor decided that the child would not live and the end.
There is a difference if they let the child die on its own or kill the child right away. The child is deliberately being killed as opposed to letting it die. Just because your letting the child die does not mean your killing it. It just means that the parents refused to do the surgery. Just like how a cancer patient refuses anymore treatment with a possibility of dying from his or her condition does not mean they are killing themselves.
Reasons for voting decision: this was just one persons opinions vs another persons opinions. no real arguments, no use of sources to prove which side is right, nothing at all. Terrible debate, not assigning points to either side
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.