Passive euthanasia is when a doctor agrees to withhold medical treatment from a terminally ill patient, leading to their eventual death. This differs from assisted suicide or mercy killing, as the doctor does not administer any substances to end the patient’s life. Passive euthanasia is legal in most places, but is a controversial topic due to concerns about the motivations behind the decision to withhold treatment.
Passive euthanasia is the term applied to the actions of a doctor in agreeing to refuse medical treatment to a terminally ill person. Many times this arrangement is made between the patient and the doctor while the patient is still conscious and able to make such a decision. Some individuals even have direct instructions to that effect placed in written form and witnessed by a third party before falling ill. In other cases, this decision is made by a family member.
Passive euthanasia differs from mercy killing or assisted suicide in that a physician does not administer a substance or any treatment intended to deliberately end a person’s life. Instead, a doctor will agree to withhold medical care when it is clear a person will not recover from a terminal illness. As such, this type of euthanasia is seen by many as a way to end the suffering of the terminally ill.
Ways to implement passive euthanasia may include not feeding a patient or stopping the fluids needed to keep the patient hydrated. By failing to provide such basic life-sustaining care, a terminally ill person eventually dies. In the absence of an agreement to withhold these elements of care, a patient may linger in a painful or vegetative state for several months, years, or even decades. Those who favor the use of passive euthanasia when deemed necessary see it as a way to end a person’s suffering when there is nothing else, medically speaking, that can be done to save their life. life.
Euthanasia laws in most jurisdictions do not consider passive euthanasia a criminal act. Assisted suicide, however, is legally considered a criminal act in most places. The difference between the two is highlighted by the fact that passive euthanasia is seen as non-interference of the imminence of death, while active euthanasia is the deliberate administration of drugs or activities with the direct intent to cause the death of a person.
While legal in most places, passive euthanasia and the right to die in the event of a terminal illness is a hotly debated topic. Among the reasons some oppose passive euthanasia is that endless pain and suffering or an altered state of consciousness may not be the only reason for its request. Instead, some believe that the suspension of medical care, even if requested by an individual patient, may sometimes be requested as a way to relieve the carer of a future burden or to help a terminally ill patient avoid a loss of dignity.
Protect your devices with Threat Protection by NordVPN
