Module 7 Callahan Worksheet

Module 7 Callahan Worksheet

Instructions/Descriptions

Module 7 Callahan Worksheet

Module 7 Reading Questions Assignment

Read the following from our textbook:
Callahan “Killing and Allowing to Die” (pp 399-402)
Brock “Voluntary Active Euthanasia” (pp 402- 404) Orentlicher “The Supreme Court and PAS…” (pp 414-418)

Read the following news articles (Located in Module 7 in the submodule ‘Module 7 Reading Questions Material’):
“A Dying Man’s Wish to Save Others Hits Hospital Ethics Hurdle” and “Assisted Suicide is Controversial But Palliative Sedation is Legal”

Respond to the questions here and submit to the Module 7 Reading Questions Assignment Dropbox.

Callahan questions:
1. What is Callahan arguing for (what is his main conclusion)?
2. Callahan tries to make the case that there is a difference between killing and letting die by referring to “three different, though overlapping, perspectives on nature and human action” (p 400). What are those three perspectives? (just list them here)
3. With regard to the first perspective, how does Callahan use it to support his claim that there is a moral difference between killing and letting die?
4. With regard to the second perspective, how does Callahan use it to support his claim that there is a moral difference between killing and letting die?
5. What is the “one group of ambiguous cases that is especially troublesome” to Callahan’s goal of making a moral distinction between killing and letting die (p. 401). Why are they troublesome for his view? How does

Callahan interpret these cases (so that they do not pose problems for his view)?

6. With regard to the final perspective, how does Callahan use it to support his view that there is a moral difference between killing and letting die?

Brock questions:
1. What 2 values does Brock mention at the beginning of his article that supports the morality of voluntary active euthanasia?
2. How does the first value you mentioned in question 1 support active euthanasia?
3. How does the second value mentioned in question 1 support active euthanasia?
4. Brock discusses, on the right side of page 403, an argument against voluntary active euthanasia. Explain that argument.
5. What is Brock’s criticism of the argument you explained in question 4?

[Order Now]

Orentlicher questions:
1. What is terminal sedation? What is the “second step” usually involved in terminal sedation?

1. Orentlicher claims that terminal sedation is a form of “slow euthanasia” (p 415). What does he mean by that?
2. Why might some people think terminal sedation is morally acceptable?
3. Why does Orentlicher say that withdrawing nutrition and hydration is different in thecase of terminal sedation from those cases where it is acceptably withdrawn from patients in PVS? (That is, why is withdrawing nutrition and hydration “more like euthanasia” in terminal sedation?)
4. Explain what the Principle of Double Effect is and how it can be used to justify terminal sedation.
5. What does Orentlicher say about this use of the Principle of Double Effect in trying to justify terminal sedation? (Does he think it works as a justification?)
6. Orentlicher states that terminal sedation is just as or more problematic than either assisted suicide or voluntary euthanasia because of the risk of abuse. Explain why he says that.
7. Orentlicher also says that terminal sedation is just as or is more problematic than assisted suicide or voluntary euthanasia because it serves fewer of the purposes of the right-to-die law. Explain his argument here.
8. Orentlicher says that “because terminal sedation is often a type of euthanasia, the Court’s acceptance of it undermines key objections to the legalization of assisted suicide” (p. 416). First, explain what the two key objections are to legalizing PAS. Then explain why Orentlicher says that terminal sedation undermines those two objections.
9. Why does Orentlicher think the Supreme Court endorsed terminal sedation? And why does he think that the Court rejected assisted suicide?

[Order Now]

Reflection Questions
As mentioned in the news article “Assisted Suicide is Controversial but Palliative Sedation is Legal,” many doctors draw a bright line between palliative sedation and euthanasia. On what basis is that line drawn? (For example—how does Thomas Strouse distinguish between the two)? How is Strouse’s view related to the Doctrine of Double Effect?

Given the answers to questions 7 and 8 for the Orentlicher article, what do you think Orentlicher would say to Strouse’s claim that there is a moral difference between palliative sedation and euthanasia? What do you think—is palliative sedation a form of “slow euthanasia” and what then does your answer here say about the moral status of both palliative sedation and active euthanasia?

Do you think the Doctrine of Double Effect is a good basis for distinguishing the ethics of palliative sedation versus (active) euthanasia (killing)? Why or why not?

After reading the article “A Dying Man’s Wish to Save Others Hits Hospital Ethics Hurdle,” reflect on the following: What are the main ethical issues raised by the situation described in the article? What do you think Callahan would say about these issues? (for example, would Callahan agree with the lawyers for University Hospital in NJ)?

What would Brock say? What are your thoughts about the Callahan and Brock articles (generally, and as they relate to this case)? In particular, do you think there is an ethical distinction between killing versus allowing to die (as Callahan argues)? Do you think active euthanasia ought to be ethically permitted?

Module 7 Callahan Worksheet

PLACE THE ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET A PERFECT SCORE!!!