Question

What is Voluntary Active Euthanasia? What is Voluntary Passive Euthanasia? Is there a legal difference between these two types of euthanasia? Is there a moral difference between these two types of euthanasia? Why or why not? In discussing the morality of the two, compare the natural law, Kantian, and utilitarian positions on this subject

Answer 1

In active euthanasia an individual directly and intentionally causes the patient's death. In passive euthanasia they don't directly take the patient's life, they simply just allow them to die.
Despite the fact that an individual doesn't 'actively kill' the patient, they know that the aftereffect of their inaction will be the demise of the patient. Active euthanasia is when demise is realized by an act- for instance when an individual is killed by being given an overdose of pain killers.Passive is when demise is realized by an omission- for example at the point when somebody allows the individual to die. This can be by withdrawing or withholding treatment.

The moral difference -Numerous individuals make an ethical qualification among active and passive euthanasia. They feel that it is worthy to retain treatment and permit a patient to pass on, however that it is never satisfactory to kill a patient by an intentional act. Some clinical individuals like this thought. They think it permits them to give a patient the death they need without managing the troublesome good issues they would confront in the event that they intentionally killed that individual.

Kant's discussions are uncompelling and his argument in these issues is undermined on thinking about different areas of his idea. Kant, in denying suicide and euthanasia, is conflating respect for people and regard for individuals, and expecting that, in executing an individual (either oneself or another), we are consequently undermining personhood. Be that as it may, a contention is defective as per Kant's own standards. There is no motivation behind why Kantian's argument need to acknowledge that self‐killing and euthanasia are in opposition to the ethical law. Regardless of whether some Kantians stick to this convention, others can dismiss it.

Kant believes that murdering ourselves when life bodes ill isn't right. In itself, this doesn't imply that voluntary euthanasia is wrong, as killing incorporates the intervention of someone else.