@article{rachels_active_1975,
	title = {Active and {Passive} {Euthanasia}},
	volume = {292},
	issn = {0028-4793},
	url = {https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM197501092920206},
	doi = {10.1056/NEJM197501092920206},
	abstract = {THE distinction between active and passive euthanasia is thought to be crucial for medical ethics. The idea is that it is permissible, at least in some cases, to withhold treatment and allow a patient to die, but it is never permissible to take any direct action designed to kill the patient. This doctrine seems to be accepted by most doctors, and it is endorsed in a statement adopted by the House of Delegates of the American Medical Association on December 4, 1973: The intentional termination of the life of one human being by another — mercy killing — is contrary . . .},
	number = {2},
	urldate = {2023-06-05},
	journal = {New England Journal of Medicine},
	author = {Rachels, James},
	month = jan,
	year = {1975},
	pmid = {1109443},
	note = {Publisher: Massachusetts Medical Society
\_eprint: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM197501092920206},
	pages = {78--80},
}

{"_id":"Yx7ZZ8ggXqrj8QrZG","bibbaseid":"rachels-activeandpassiveeuthanasia-1975","author_short":["Rachels, J."],"bibdata":{"bibtype":"article","type":"article","title":"Active and Passive Euthanasia","volume":"292","issn":"0028-4793","url":"https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM197501092920206","doi":"10.1056/NEJM197501092920206","abstract":"THE distinction between active and passive euthanasia is thought to be crucial for medical ethics. The idea is that it is permissible, at least in some cases, to withhold treatment and allow a patient to die, but it is never permissible to take any direct action designed to kill the patient. This doctrine seems to be accepted by most doctors, and it is endorsed in a statement adopted by the House of Delegates of the American Medical Association on December 4, 1973: The intentional termination of the life of one human being by another — mercy killing — is contrary . . .","number":"2","urldate":"2023-06-05","journal":"New England Journal of Medicine","author":[{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Rachels"],"firstnames":["James"],"suffixes":[]}],"month":"January","year":"1975","pmid":"1109443","note":"Publisher: Massachusetts Medical Society _eprint: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM197501092920206","pages":"78–80","bibtex":"@article{rachels_active_1975,\n\ttitle = {Active and {Passive} {Euthanasia}},\n\tvolume = {292},\n\tissn = {0028-4793},\n\turl = {https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM197501092920206},\n\tdoi = {10.1056/NEJM197501092920206},\n\tabstract = {THE distinction between active and passive euthanasia is thought to be crucial for medical ethics. The idea is that it is permissible, at least in some cases, to withhold treatment and allow a patient to die, but it is never permissible to take any direct action designed to kill the patient. This doctrine seems to be accepted by most doctors, and it is endorsed in a statement adopted by the House of Delegates of the American Medical Association on December 4, 1973: The intentional termination of the life of one human being by another — mercy killing — is contrary . . .},\n\tnumber = {2},\n\turldate = {2023-06-05},\n\tjournal = {New England Journal of Medicine},\n\tauthor = {Rachels, James},\n\tmonth = jan,\n\tyear = {1975},\n\tpmid = {1109443},\n\tnote = {Publisher: Massachusetts Medical Society\n\\_eprint: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM197501092920206},\n\tpages = {78--80},\n}\n\n\n\n","author_short":["Rachels, J."],"key":"rachels_active_1975","id":"rachels_active_1975","bibbaseid":"rachels-activeandpassiveeuthanasia-1975","role":"author","urls":{"Paper":"https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM197501092920206"},"metadata":{"authorlinks":{}},"downloads":0,"html":""},"bibtype":"article","biburl":"https://bibbase.org/zotero/daniel.r","dataSources":["bMNYYYE8ALPmpK328"],"keywords":[],"search_terms":["active","passive","euthanasia","rachels"],"title":"Active and Passive Euthanasia","year":1975}