The Moral Difference Between Killing And Letting Die.
Many people make a moral distinction between active and passive euthanasia.
Active euthanasia occurs when the medical professionals, or another person, deliberately do something that causes the person to die. Passive euthanasia occurs when the person dies because the medical professionals either don't do something necessary to keep the person alive, or stop doing something necessary to keep the person alive. .
They think it is acceptable to withhold treatment and allow a person to die, but that it is never acceptable to kill a person by a deliberate act.
Some medical professionals like this idea. They think it allows them to provide a patient with the death they want without having to deal without having to deal with the difficult moral problems they would face if they deliberately killed the person.
The majority of church members don't like this idea, they believe that any intervention in the death process is wrong, that to interfere in God's plan is wrong. They think it is wrong to aid killing a person under any circumstances, even if it is their wish, morals don't apply. .
" Thou shall not kill but needst not strive, officiously, to keep alive." Arthur Hugh Clough [ 1819-1861 ].
There Is No Real Difference.
But some people think this distinction is nonsense, since stopping treatment is a deliberate act, deciding not to carry out a particular treatment is not a deliberate act.
Switching off a respirator requires someone to carry out the action of throwing out the switch. If the person dies as a result of the doctor switching off the respirator then although it's certainly true that the person dies from their illness, it's also true that the immediate cause of their death is the switching off of the machine keeping them alive.
In active euthanasia the doctor takes an action with the intention that it will cause patients death.