1. The Morality of Euthanasia
Active euthanasia —Performing an action that directly causes someone to die (“mercy killing”).
Passive euthanasia —Allowing someone to die by not performing some life-sustaining action.

2. The Morality of Euthanasia
Voluntary euthanasia —Euthanasia requested or agreed to by the patient.
Nonvoluntary euthanasia —Euthanasia requested by persons other than the patient, when the patient cannot request it herself and her wishes are unknown.

3. The Morality of Euthanasia
Passive euthanasia (both voluntary and nonvoluntary) is legal.
The strongest argument for active voluntary euthanasia is derived from the principle of autonomy.
Those who oppose euthanasia often draw a sharp distinction between killing and letting die.

4. The Morality of Euthanasia
Some argue against active voluntary euthanasia by advancing a distinction between intending someone’s death and not intending but foreseeing it.
The mere possibility of abuses arising from allowing euthanasia or assisted suicide is in itself not a good reason to ban the practice.
Some maintain that there is no morally significant difference between mercifully killing a patient and mercifully letting a patient die.

5. The Morality of Euthanasia
Voluntary Active Euthanasia —Dan W. Brock
The possible good consequences of establishing a public policy of permitting voluntary active euthanasia outweigh the bad.
The distinction between killing and allowing to die is confused.

6. The Morality of Euthanasia
The Wrongfulness of Euthanasia —J. Gay-Williams
Active euthanasia is inherently wrong because the action conflicts with natural law.
The practice will lead to widespread abuse.

7. The Morality of Euthanasia
Active and Passive Euthanasia —James Rachels
There is no morally significant difference between killing and letting die.
To doctors: Do not write the traditional distinction between active and passive euthanasia into official statements of medical ethics.