The Pros And Cons Of Euthanasia

When it comes to discussing accountability for an action, it is common for one to argue whether or not there is a moral difference between doing an action and allowing that same action to happen. Some argue that there is a very clear difference between the two, while others argue that the distinction between the two depends on the agent in question’s relationship to the sequence of events that brought about an outcome. It seems that one cannot be responsible for the outcome of something they are not involved with; but it can be also be argued that allowing an event to occur bears the same moral responsibility as doing that action, because they both bring about the same result. So, is there a clearly defined line between doing and allowing that provides us with a morally right and wrong answer? One popular example of doing vs allowing that is still being debated today is whether or not Euthanasia, or “mercy killing” is right or wrong, and how it differs from the practice of withdrawing medical treatment to bring about a patient’s death. It can be argued that actively killing a patient through euthanasia is morally equivalent to withdrawing medical care and allowing a patient to die, since both sequences of events bring about the same result. Although it is popular to believe that actively acting with the intention to kill another person is always wrong, it can argued that euthanasia is not wrong, and sometimes is right, because it allows for a patient to maintain their dignity, die a peaceful death, and put an end to their pain and suffering.

One of the most popular arguments when considering doing vs allowing is the argument that there is a clear distinction between doing an action to bring about a consequence and a consequence ...

... middle of paper ...

...ie. Counterarguments have also been proposed, all with different bases that vary from religious opposition to individual rights, but the primary argument that there is a difference between letting die and euthanasia just an argument for the sake of arguing, because even though the methods differ, they bring about the same mean.
The distinction between doing and allowing can be made, but the moral applications of it vary based on the situation to which they are applied. It can be argued, though, that when doing and allowing both bring about the same consequence, there is no moral difference in which action is chosen. Even though many different distinctions can be made between how doing and allowing bring about different sequences, they both bring about the same means; therefore, logical reasoning and a level head must be used to evaluate the right course of action.