KIE: The author examines various claimed differences between active and passive
euthanasia and, if there are differences, whether they are morally significant. He refutes …

In their account of passive euthanasia, Garrard and Wilkinson present arguments that might
lead one to overlook significant moral differences between killing and letting die. To kill is …

Coggon's remarks on a previous paper on active and passive euthanasia elicit a clarification
and an elaboration of the argument in support of the claim that there is a moral difference …

Is there a morally significant distinction between killing and letting die? In particular, is killing
worse, in itself, than letting die? This question has received much attention in recent years …

The conventional assumption is that killing a person is worse than allowing her to die.
Beginning with James Rachels' famous article “Active and Passive Euthanasia”, first …

James Rachels was a professor of philosophy at the University of Alabama at Birmingham.
He was the author of Created from Animals: The Moral Implications of Darwinism (1990) …

Belgium legalised voluntary euthanasia in 2002, thus ending the long isolation of the
Netherlands as the only country in which doctors could openly give lethal injections to …

The traditional distinction between active and passive euthanasia requires critical analysis.
The conventional doctrine is that there is such an important moral difference between the …

In order to discuss the normative aspects of euthanasia one has to clarify what is meant by
active and passive euthanasia. Many philosophers deny the possibility of distinguishing the …

Several papers in this issue relate to the questions of-or as some would have it, the question
of-(a) when and why to forego life-prolonging treatment and (b) whether intentional killing of …