ABSTRACT
We have seen in the last chapter that a distinction is often drawn, generally by those who oppose legalisation of assisted dying, between some deaths in which there is third party involvement but are deemed to be appropriate or acceptable and deaths brought about with active third party assistance at the request of the patient, which are deemed to be inappropriate. I have already suggested that these distinctions are untenable and in this chapter I will explain precisely why this is the case. To adopt the position that opponents of assisted dying want to take, there must necessarily be some meaningful distinction that can be drawn between the various types of life-ending behaviour. This is usually done by postulating that there is a distinction between actively killing someone and letting someone die. The former it is said is, and should remain, an illegal action; the latter is essentially part of medical care and treatment. In the latter case, it is argued, the death does not come about because of the actions of the healthcare professional but rather occurs because of the underlying condition affecting the patient. In this chapter, I will show why this distinction carries no moral or ethical weight and will argue that it should be directly rejected by the law.
