研究生综合英语,单元.ppt

The distinction between active and passive euthanasia is thought to be crucial_ for medical ethics. Passive euthanasia is the cessation_ of the treatment and permissible_ while active euthanasia is contrary_ to the policy of AMA. Several arguments are going to be put forward to make a strong case_ against the doctrine. Once the initial decision not to prolong his agnoy(痛苦)_ has been made, active euthanasia is actually preferable to passive euthanasia. The process of being “allowed to die” can be relatively slow_ and painful and contrary to the humanitarian__ impulses whereas being given a lethal(致命)_ injection is relatively quick and painless. For a patient who is dying of incurable cancer of throat, the pain can not be alleviated_ while for the baby born with Down’s syndrome together with the intestinal obstruction, the dehydration and infection wither_ him over hours and days. In the above two cases, passive euthanasia is really a terrible ordeal(折磨)_ for them. The conventional doctrine leads to decisions concerning life and death made on irrelevant_ grounds. As an operation to remove the intestinal obstruction is not prohibitively_ difficult, the matter of life of death should not allowed to depend on the essential irrelevant question of whether the intestinal tract is blocked, instead on the basis of Down’s syndrome_. Killing is not morally worse than letting someone die. In both cases, Jones and Smith acted from the same motive_ and the same end in view_. Therefore, Jones should be as relevant_ as Smith and his defense of “doing nothing and letting die” is only a grotesque怪诞的 perversion歪曲，曲解_ of moral reasoning. The doctors do not involve the personal gain and the destruction of the healthy child, hence the bare difference between killing and letting die does not , in itself, make a moral difference. The AMA contended that cessation of treatment is not the intentional_ termination of life and many people also find it hard to accept this judgment because the