Deck 49: Active and Passive Euthanasia James Rachels

Question 1

Which of the following best characterizes Rachels's view of the 1973 American Medical Association statement?

A) It wisely upholds the traditional moral distinction between active and passive euthanasia.
B) Its acceptance of passive euthanasia draws us into dangerous moral territory.
C) It unwisely opposes active euthanasia, which is sometimes morally preferable to passive euthanasia.
D) It leaves far too much to the discretion of the patient and the patient's immediate family.

Answer 1

C

Question 2

Active euthanasia involves

A) the intentional termination of one's life by another person to relieve pain and suffering.
B) the cessation of the employment of "extraordinary means" to prolong one's life.
C) intentionally causing a patient's death against the patient's wishes.
D) the refusal to treat a patient against the patient's wishes.

Answer 2

A

Question 3

What point does Rachels intend to make with the example of Jones letting his cousin drown in the bathtub?

A) The difference between killing someone and letting them die is not in itself a morally relevant issue.
B) We have a moral obligation to refrain from killing others but no obligation to intervene to prevent them from dying.
C) Neither active nor passive euthanasia should be thought of as killing.
D) Euthanasia is never permissible when the patient is a minor.

Answer 3

A

Question 4

To what does Rachels attribute the commonly held opinion that killing is intrinsically worse than letting someone die?

A) Moral intuitions supported by sound philosophical reasoning
B) The hold that religious dogma continues to have even on those who understand themselves as nonbelievers
C) The fact that most actual cases of killing are more reprehensible than most actual cases of letting a person die
D) All of the above

Question 5

According to Rachels, when might it be permissible to take direct action to end the life of a terminally ill patient?

A) Never or almost never
B) Whenever the patient sincerely and repeatedly requests that such action be taken
C) As soon as the decision to cease treatment has been made
D) When the patient loses the capacity to communicate

Question 6

Rachels argues that, in passive euthanasia, the doctor does something in the sense that

A) he kills rather than lets the patient die.
B) his refusal to act is subject to moral appraisal.
C) he is bound by the American Medical Association's official statement of ethics.
D) there are legal consequences attached to his behavior.

Question 7

According to the American Medical Association, who should have the final word on whether to cease the use of extraordinary means to preserve life?

A) The physician
B) The hospital's committee on medical ethics
C) The hospital chaplain
D) The patient or the patient's immediate family

Question 8

Which of the following objections does Rachels make to the prohibition of active euthanasia?

A) It leads to decisions about life and death being made on irrelevant grounds.
B) It leaves decisions about life and death solely in the hands of doctors.
C) It encourages costly and ineffective efforts to prolong the lives of terminally ill patients.
D) None of the above

Question 9

According to Rachels, many believe the difference between active and passive euthanasia lies in the

A) doctor becoming part of the causal chain in the former but not in the latter.
B) American Medical Association saying there is a difference between the former and the latter.
C) law saying there is a difference between the former and the latter.
D) None of the above

Question 10

According to the conventional doctrine, passive euthanasia is sometimes morally permissible.

Question 11

Rachels believes that legal prohibitions on killing by doctors should be reflected in official professional statements of medical ethics such as those by the American Medical Association.

Question 12

Withholding treatment with the intention of ending the patient's life, to prevent the patient's further suffering, is an example of active euthanasia.

Question 13

Rachels argues that killing someone is not necessarily morally worse than letting that person die.

Question 14

In 1973, the American Medical Association declared its opposition to "mercy killing."

Question 15

According to Rachels, passively watching a child drown in a bathtub is the moral equivalent of murder.

Question 16

Rachels is opposed in principle to active euthanasia.

Question 17

The decision to let someone die, Rachels argues, is a type of action that is subject to moral appraisal.

Question 18

Rachels believes that criminal charges should be pressed against doctors who kill their patients for any reason.

Question 19

What is the "conventional doctrine" regarding active and passive euthanasia? What reasons are typically given in support of this view? Do you think they are good reasons? Why or why not?

Question 20

What would you do if you found yourself in a situation such as the one Rachels describes of having a baby with Down syndrome and a life-threatening intestinal blockage? Would you tell the doctors to operate to save the baby's life? Why or why not?

Question 21

Does Rachels think that there is a moral difference between killing a person and letting him die? What reasons does he give for his view? Do you find his position plausible?