James Rachels Death And Dying :: essays research papers fc

James Rachels Death and Dying     James Rachels is one of the most controversial philosophers talked aboutin todays society. One of his most talked about topics is whether a person hasa right to die or not. Not much is known about Rachels expect for the manyarticles and books he has written. In the controversy of let a person dieor killing him, he does not try to explain which method is good and which methodis bad. He however tries to explain why they both 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 death or just putting him outof his misery by killing him is an ongoing struggle. If you let a person starveto death, it might be putting that person through a lot of pain but hell stillbe alive (who knows, maybe a miracle cure will be found.) If you killed him onthe spot with a lethal injection, it would be a more peaceful death but youwould be cut dow n that persons life. Putting a person to death in a peacefulmanner is called euthanasia. mercy killing is an ancient word that means "easydeath." There is to a fault the issue of morality. Would killing someone by theirown will or suicide be a moral act? What about a persevering that is suffering fromcancer? Is it moral to let that person suffer? These are some of the manyquestions people 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 skillfulto his or her life. Even though nobody wants to go through the hardship ofdeciding whether a person should live or die, it happens everyday. There are ii forms of euthanasia. There is an active euthanasia and a passive euthanasia(Jussim 7-13). This so-called distinction between active and passive waschallenged by Rachels in a subject first published in 1975 in the New 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 afamiliar type of situation, a patient who is anxious(p) of incurable cancer of thethroat is in terrible pain, which can no longer be satisfactorily alleviated.