Euthanasia and Assisted SuicideIn her article entitled "Euthanasia", Phillipa Foot observes that euthanasia should be regarded as "the induction or otherwise choosing of death for the good of the one who is about to die." "(MI, 8). In Moral Matters, Jan Narveson argues, I believe successfully, that, given the moral basis for suicide, voluntary euthanasia is morally acceptable (at least in principle). Daniel Callahan, on the other song, in his “When Self-Determination Runs Amok,” counters that traditional pro-(active) euthanasia arguments regarding self-determination, the distinction between killing and allowing to die, and skepticism about harmful consequences for society, are imperfect. I do not think that Callahan's reasoning establishes that euthanasia is actually morally wrong and legally impossible, and I will attempt to demonstrate this. Callahan goes on to first state that euthanasia is different from suicide in that it involves not only a person's right to itself -determination, but also the transfer of the right to kill to the acting agent (presumably a doctor). This right, however, is temporary and limited to killing the patient only. It is not clear why this temporary transfer makes euthanasia wrong, because if this is wrong, then it is also wrong to let a patient die (in case the patient already has the assistance of life support equipment), if there is no it is a distinction between killing and letting die. Thus, we must return to this topic after addressing Callahan's claims of a distinction between killing and allowing to die. The argument for the distinction is based on the cause of death. In the classic example of a doctor disconnecting life-sustaining equipment, the cause of death cited is disease or... middle of paper... I have advanced considerations that counter Callahan's reasoning against three types of arguments that support euthanasia: the right to self-determination, the insignificant difference between killing and letting a person die by removing their life support, and the fact that the positive consequences of euthanasia outweigh the harmful consequences are all positive, relevant and valid factors in the evaluation morality of euthanasia. euthanasia. Callahan's objections against these reasons do not hold water. Works Cited MI: Narveson, Jan, ed. Moral issues. Toronto: Oxford, 1983.EI: Soifer, Eldon, ed. Ethical issues. Peterborough: Broadview Press, 1997.MM: Narveson, Jan. Moral Questions. Peterborough: Broadview Press, 1993. Callahan, Daniel. When self-determination breaks loose, in Hastings Center Report, March-April 1992, pp. 52-55. In EI, pp.409-415.