Hopkins P D
Hastings Cent Rep. 1997 May-Jun;27(3):29-37.
The distinction between "passive" and "active" euthanasia, though problematic and highly criticized, retains a certain intuitive appeal. When a patient is allowed to die, nature appears simply to be taking its course. Yet when a patient is killed by, say, a lethal injection, humans appear to be causing his or her death. Guilt seems to follow naturally from the latter act while not from the former. Yet this view only holds up if age-old and vague ideas about "nature" and "artifice" go unscrutinized. Once examined more closely the functional relevance of particular machines to particular bodies becomes evident. And the innocence and guilt less clear.
“被动”安乐死和“主动”安乐死之间的区别，尽管存在问题且饱受批评，但仍具有一定的直观吸引力。当允许患者死亡时，似乎只是顺其自然。然而，当患者通过例如注射致命药物被杀死时，似乎是人类导致了其死亡。后一种行为似乎自然会带来内疚感，而前一种则不会。然而，只有当关于“自然”和“人为”的古老而模糊的观念未经审视时，这种观点才站得住脚。一旦更仔细地审视，特定机器与特定身体的功能相关性就会变得明显。而无辜与有罪也变得不那么清晰了。
