James Rachels Death And Dying :: essays research papers fc

James Rachels Death and dying     James Rachels is bingle of the most controversial philosophers talked aboutin todays society. unitary of his most talked about topics is whether a person hasa right to happen or not. Not much is known about Rachels expect for the many an(prenominal) an(prenominal)articles and books he has written. In the controversy of permit a person distributeor killing him, he does not try to explain which method is good and which methodis bad. He however tries to explain why they two are bad to a certain degree.Rachels does not take one side, but tries to convince why one is better than theother. In his opinion, letting a person starve to shoemakers last or just move him outof his misery by killing him is an ongoing struggle. If you let a person starveto death, it might be putting that person by means of a lot of pain but hell stillbe awake(p) (who knows, maybe a miracle cure will be found.) If you killed him onthe line with a lethal injection, it would be a more peaceful death but youwould be shortening that persons life. Putting a person to death in a peacefulmanner is called mercy killing. Euthanasia is an ancient leger that means "easydeath." There is also the issue of morality. Would killing soulfulness by theirown will or suicide be a moral act? What about a patient that is suffering from crabmeat? Is it moral to let that person suffer? These are some of the manyquestions mass have been trying to answer for year without success.     Euthanasia is a very uncomfortable subject to talk about for most peoplebecause who wants to think about having to kill oneself or a person that is dearto his or her life. Even though nobody wants to go through the rigorousness ofdeciding whether a person should live or die, it happens everyday. There aretwo forms of euthanasia. There is an active euthanasia and a still euthanasia(Jussim 7-13). This so-called distinction between activ e and passive waschallenged by Rachels in a paper first published in 1975 in the new-made EnglandJournal of Medicine. In that paper, Rachels challenges both the use and moralsignificance of that distinction. He argues that active euthanasia is in manycases is more humane than passive euthanasia. Rachels urges doctors toreconsider their views on active euthanasia. He writes "To begin with a long-familiar type of situation, a patient who is dying of incurable cancer of the pharynx is in terrible pain, which can no longer be satisfactorily alleviated.