PLS3701 ASSIGNMENT 2 2026
DUE 10 APRIL 2026
Do you think that euthanasia in the form of physician assistance in dying is
ethically different from letting a patient die by withdrawing treatment or
life‑support? Write an essay in which you answer this question. Provide reasons
for your argument.
Physician‑assisted dying (PAD) where a doctor provides the means for a patient to end
their own life, is often contrasted with the withdrawal of life‑sustaining treatment (also
called passive euthanasia). In South Africa the law permits passive euthanasia but
explicitly prohibits active assistance (Study guide, unit 11, pp. 144‑147). The question is
whether this legal distinction rests on a genuine ethical difference. In this essay I argue
that there is no morally relevant difference between physician‑assisted dying and letting
a patient die by withdrawing treatment or life‑support.
My argument is based on the work of James Rachels, the principle of double effect, and
the DECA decision‑making framework taught in this module, and responds to the main
counter‑arguments that appeal to acts versus omissions, the role of the physician, and
the slippery slope.
DUE 10 APRIL 2026
Do you think that euthanasia in the form of physician assistance in dying is
ethically different from letting a patient die by withdrawing treatment or
life‑support? Write an essay in which you answer this question. Provide reasons
for your argument.
Physician‑assisted dying (PAD) where a doctor provides the means for a patient to end
their own life, is often contrasted with the withdrawal of life‑sustaining treatment (also
called passive euthanasia). In South Africa the law permits passive euthanasia but
explicitly prohibits active assistance (Study guide, unit 11, pp. 144‑147). The question is
whether this legal distinction rests on a genuine ethical difference. In this essay I argue
that there is no morally relevant difference between physician‑assisted dying and letting
a patient die by withdrawing treatment or life‑support.
My argument is based on the work of James Rachels, the principle of double effect, and
the DECA decision‑making framework taught in this module, and responds to the main
counter‑arguments that appeal to acts versus omissions, the role of the physician, and
the slippery slope.
