Death, is it okay to let a suffering person die, or should doctors give them a lethal injection to end their suffering? Many people have different views on this situation, but I believe that it is the patients decision because the patient knows how much pain they are in, and if they can not take it any longer. In the essay "Active and Passive Euthanasia" James Rachels wrote that he thinks that it is a better choice morally to withdraw life support, and let a person die, rather than ending a persons life through other means.I do not believe that if a patient is about to die, and that patient makes a request to withhold treatment that the doctor should withhold it. To me that is going to make the patient suffer even more than he already is, so I believe that the doctor should either continue giving the patient their treatment, or ask if they would like to have their life terminated with a lethal infection.I also believe that the patients immediate family should have a say in what happens. Let's say that the patient has been in a coma for several months, and the only thing that is keeping the patient alive is a life support system, then the family should have the choice on if they want the patient to live or die. I also believe that the family should choose, if the patient is alive, but he is going through tremendous suffering, and if the patient is aware of thing, but isn't responding to the things around him.I believe that withholding treatment from a patient is wrong, because in a way that is like Hibdon 2slowly murdering that person. If you withhold treatment from a patient they are going to go through probably more pain or suffering that with the treatment. The doctor should either keep treating the patient, or try to help the patient end his life altogether.The example in the book that talks about how "dehydration and infection wither a tiny being over hours, and days" is terrible. I don't think that it should matter if...
