07年“高級(jí)英語(yǔ)”課文逐句翻譯（4）

　　lesson4

　　自己選擇死亡方式

　　Lesson Four 　Die as You Choose

　　制定關(guān)于安樂(lè)死的法律已經(jīng)到了不能再回避的地步。

　　The need for laws on euthanasia cannot be dodged for much longer.

　　在世界上某個(gè)較小的國(guó)家里，安樂(lè)死被醫(yī)療機(jī)構(gòu)普遍接受，每年都有數(shù)千例公開(kāi)實(shí)施。

　　In one of the world's smaller countries， mercy-killing is accepted by the medical establishment and openly practiced a few thousand times each year.

　　而在某個(gè)世界大國(guó)，安樂(lè)死雖然經(jīng)常受到醫(yī)療機(jī)構(gòu)的公開(kāi)譴責(zé)，每年卻以數(shù)倍于此的次數(shù)秘密實(shí)施，且從未公之于眾。

　　In one of the world's biggest countries， euthanasia is condemned by the medical establishment， secretly practiced many times more often， and almost never comes to light.

　　但是，在上述那個(gè)國(guó)家有醫(yī)生因?yàn)閷?shí)施安樂(lè)死而在監(jiān)獄里服刑呢？

　　Which of these countries has a mercy-killing doctor now languishing in its jails？

　　是在小國(guó)荷蘭。荷蘭制定了有關(guān)安樂(lè)死的法律，能有效地管理它。

　　It is the small one， Holland， which has rules for euthanasia and so can police it effectively.

　　那位荷蘭的醫(yī)生違反了他國(guó)家的規(guī)定。

　　The Dutch doctor broke his country's rules.

　　有關(guān)安樂(lè)死的問(wèn)題在所有國(guó)家都存在，決不僅出現(xiàn)在美國(guó)這個(gè)禁止安樂(lè)死的大國(guó)。

　　There is a moral here for all the countries， and not just for the big death-forbidding country， America.

　　目前美國(guó)正再次展開(kāi)有關(guān)安樂(lè)死的辯論。

　　Right now it is going over the arguments about euthanasia once again.

　　美國(guó)醫(yī)學(xué)協(xié)會(huì)會(huì)刊1月份發(fā)表了一封非同尋常的來(lái)信。一位醫(yī)生在信中宣稱(chēng)自己按照病人的意愿，殺死了一位身患癌癥的20歲女孩。

　　In January the Journal of the American Medical Association published a bizarre letter， in which an anonymous doctor claimed to have killed a 20-year-old cancer patient at her own request.

　　這件事引起了一場(chǎng)辯論，而這場(chǎng)辯論將轟轟烈烈地持續(xù)到秋季，那時(shí)加利福尼亞州可能會(huì)就一項(xiàng)使安樂(lè)死合法化的法律進(jìn)行投票表決。

　　This started a debate that will rumble on into the autumn， when Californians may vote on a proposed law legalizing euthanasia.

　　這封信可能是為了起到引發(fā)爭(zhēng)論的效果，內(nèi)容并不可信。

　　The letter was probably written for polemical impact. It is scarcely credible.

　　是作者自己在信中聲稱(chēng)他（或她）第一次與那位得了癌癥的病人見(jiàn)面，聽(tīng)到病人說(shuō)出5個(gè)字——“讓我去死吧”——然后就殺了她。

　　It's author claims that he met the cancer patient for the first time， heard five words from her – “Let's get this over with” – then killer her.

　　即使是極端的安樂(lè)死支持者也不贊成在這種情況下采取如此做法。

　　Even the most extreme proponents of euthanasia do not support such an action in those circumstances.

　　然而，醫(yī)療上出現(xiàn)的可怕事件如洪水猛獸一般，并不比安樂(lè)死的情況更好。它們無(wú)疑會(huì)在英美以及其他國(guó)家中繼續(xù)肆虐，幾乎成了令人恐怖的常規(guī)。

　　Yet medical monstrosities that are hardly any better undoubtedly continue， almost as a matter of macabre routine， in America， Britain and many other countries.

　　一些醫(yī)生私下透露他們有時(shí)會(huì)故意殺死病人，這樣的情況非常普遍，令人擔(dān)憂。

　　It is disturbingly easy to find doctors who will say， in private， that they sometimes kill patients on purpose.

　　多數(shù)醫(yī)生說(shuō)他們知道其他醫(yī)生也有同樣的行為，但是因?yàn)榧词乖诓∪似蚯笏麄兊臅r(shí)候，醫(yī)生也幾乎不能與病人公開(kāi)討論安樂(lè)死，因此醫(yī)生往往傾向于僅在要死的人處于垂?；杳灾H而無(wú)法表達(dá)是否同意安樂(lè)死時(shí)，才結(jié)束其生命。

　　Most say that know somebody else who does. But because they can rarely discuss euthanasia openly with patients – even when those patients beg them for it – doctors tend to kill only when the dying are too far gone to consent.

　　由于自愿要求安樂(lè)死受到禁止，就只能由醫(yī)生自行作出決定了，病人會(huì)在夜間受到藥物注射而非自愿地離開(kāi)人世。

　　Thus， because voluntary euthanasia is taboo， a doctor makes the decision himself – and the patient is killed involuntarily in the night with a syringe.

　　這是不使安樂(lè)死公開(kāi)的代價(jià)。

　　That is one price of keeping euthanasia secret.

　　如果所有形式的安樂(lè)死都是錯(cuò)誤的，那就應(yīng)該統(tǒng)統(tǒng)列入禁止之列。

　　If all forms of mercy-killing are wrong， they should remain taboo.

　　可情況果真如此嗎？

　　But are they？

　　許多人都認(rèn)為依靠醫(yī)學(xué)技術(shù)來(lái)延續(xù)生命帶給人的痛苦是令人悲哀、可憎可惡的，完全不顧人的尊嚴(yán)，因此被動(dòng)的安樂(lè)死——讓病人自行死亡——被人們普遍接受。

　　Because many people accept that it is sad， undignified and gruesome to prolong the throes of death will all the might of medical technology， passive euthanasia – letting patients die – is widely accepted.

　　美國(guó)大多數(shù)州都有關(guān)于“活遺囑”的法規(guī)，為醫(yī)生提供保護(hù)。如果醫(yī)生沒(méi)有盡力救助曾聲明不想延續(xù)生命的病人，不會(huì)為此受到起訴。

　　Most American states have “l(fā)iving – will” legislation that protects doctors from prosecution if they do not try to save someone who has said he does not want life prolonged.

　　主動(dòng)的安樂(lè)死——?dú)⑺啦∪恕獏s依然爭(zhēng)論頗多。

　　Active euthanasia – killing – remains controversial.

　　將人殺死與讓人死亡之間的界線還能維持多久呢？

　　How long can the distinction between killing and letting die hold out？

　　正如因未履行某種職責(zé)受到處罰一樣，人也可能因干了某事而不受責(zé)難。

　　Just as there can be culpable omissions， so too can there be blameless acts.

　　讓我們從道德倫理著作中舉例說(shuō)明。假定一個(gè)人會(huì)從某個(gè)孩子的死亡中獲益，當(dāng)這個(gè)孩子在浴缸中撞傷頭部而失去知覺(jué)時(shí)，那個(gè)人視而不見(jiàn)，任其溺水身亡。

　　Suppose – to take an example from the moral philosophy books – that a man stands to gain from the death of a certain child. The child strikes his head in the bath and falls unconscious. The man sits down and watches him drown.

　　雖然這個(gè)人什么都沒(méi)有做，但他并不能因此開(kāi)脫罪責(zé)。

　　The fact that the man has performed no action does not excuse him.

　　同樣，再假設(shè)為了縮短而不是延長(zhǎng)死亡到來(lái)的時(shí)間，醫(yī)生終止某種治療是無(wú)可指責(zé)的做法，那么如果這位醫(yī)生使用足夠的鎮(zhèn)痛劑致使病人死亡，他就一定大錯(cuò)特錯(cuò)嗎？

　　Similarly， suppose that a doctor does no wrong by withholding some treatment in order that death should come sooner rather than later. Is he then necessarily wrong if he administers enough painkillers to kill？

　　這位醫(yī)生采取了某種行動(dòng)，而不是未盡某種職責(zé)，這會(huì)使他有罪嗎？

　　Does the fact that the doctor performed an action， rather than an omission， condemn him？

　　許多醫(yī)生一直在為解除病人臨終前的痛苦而奮斗著。他們認(rèn)為在病人請(qǐng)求安樂(lè)死時(shí)，根本無(wú)法截然區(qū)分被動(dòng)與主動(dòng)的安樂(lè)死。

　　Many doctors working on the battlefield of terminal suffering think that only squeamishness demands a firm difference between passive and active euthanasia on request.

　　他們贊成醫(yī)生殺死病人的理由是：醫(yī)生的職責(zé)之一就是使病人免遭痛苦，這是醫(yī)生所做的全部事情，而殺死病人則是做到這一點(diǎn)的惟一辦法。

　　Their argument for killing goes like this： one of a doctor's duties is to prevent suffering； sometimes that is all there is left for him to do， and killing is the only way to do it.

　　這個(gè)觀點(diǎn)并不新穎。當(dāng)希波克拉底為醫(yī)生制定信條的時(shí)候，曾明確禁止安樂(lè)死，而多數(shù)其他希臘醫(yī)生和思想家都不贊成這一禁令。

　　There is nothing new in this view. When Hippocrates formulated his oath for doctors， which explicitly rules out active killing， most other Greek doctors and thinkers disagreed with his ban.

　　前事不忘，后事之師。

　　Let the past be a guide.

　　有人認(rèn)為死亡的時(shí)間是上帝安排的，任何人不得縮短他人的生命，然而假如一位病人的人生觀使其接受安樂(lè)死，那么人們不禁要問(wèn)：為什么其他人還要用不同的宗教觀念去干預(yù)其死亡呢？

　　Some people believe that the time of death is appointed by God and that no man should put the clock back on another. Yet if a patient's philosophical views embrace euthanasia， it is not clear why the religious objections of o