Physician-assisted suicide (PAS) and euthanasia raise ethical questions about the medicalization of death (J Hardwig, 2006; Kavanaugh, 2000) and the question of whether it is worse to kill a patient or let them die through neglect of treatment (Kavanaugh, 2000). All have the same outcome – the death of the patient – ​​the ethical dilemma arises when considering the manner in which the patient's death occurred (Rachels, 1975). Allowing a patient to die from the cessation of bodily functions can be a distressing process and can prolong that patient's suffering (Brock, 1992). However, prematurely ending a patient's life appears to contradict the purpose of the medical profession, namely the Hippocratic Oath, and has even more serious consequences in the community. The increasing ability to prolong life has created an effect called the “medicalization of death” (J Hardwig, 2006; Stringer, 2007). In "The Hour of Our Death", Aries (Aries, 1981) discusses changing conceptions of death, as the patient is more often seen as being surrounded by tubes and machines rather than in a more comfortable environment when 'he dies. The concept of an idyllic death makes us wonder when is the best time to die. By controlling our death, euthanasia instills the idea that a more pleasant death is achievable. Rachel (Rachels, 1975) argues that the Hippocratic Oath is inappropriate because being allowed to die can be a slow process. Therefore, by not killing the patient, the doctor and caregivers are causing the patient suffering. In some circumstances, I agree that the intent of killing, because it is to relieve suffering, absolves the doctor or caregiver of the guilt normally associated with the act of killing....... middle of paper ......ing people should be killed instead of seeking healing. Personal judgments regarding others' choices to die of natural causes or be euthanized should be reserved, especially if the patient chooses to no longer be a burden to their loved ones, as this too is a valid choice. reason in certain circumstances. We all die in countless ways and our autonomous decision to choose active euthanasia or SAP must be respected, as must our choice to refuse euthanasia. Killing a patient who has chosen to die quickly does not, in my opinion, have the same ethical implications as letting a patient die when they can no longer bear to live. I conclude that it is generally better to kill a patient if his life has become unbearable and he does not anticipate reestablishment of an acceptable quality of life, rather than to prolong life which is not desired..