As of 2019 euthanasia, also known as physician assisted suicide, is legal in only eight out of the 50 states in America, and globally three countries. “Why active euthanasia and physician assisted suicide should be legalized” by Len Doyal was created in 2001, in purposes to persuade his audience on the idea of legalizing this practice. He compares the act of euthanasia, to the concept of withdrawing life sustaining treatments to those who are sustained by medical technology, and no longer find that these treatments are beneficial, or become a burden. Both practices lead to the same ending, the death of a patient, so why is one justified and the other is not, is what Doyal argues. Doyal presents his argument to a very specific audience being other physicians, with the help of the rhetorical triangle, incorporating a real-life scenario and his structure, while going back and forth between both concepts, his word choice, his tone, and evidently the facts.

In Doyal’s article his structure and word choice are a major component as to how he efficiently delivers his message towards his audience. Doyal incorporates a rea life example of Diane Pretty, being that she was denied the decision of euthanasia, because of the law. Incorporating this scenario, creates a buildup of emotions towards the topic, as well as credibility to the author, rather than simply listing why euthanasia should be legal. Loyal is constantly going back and forth between what is legal and what is not, as well as many topics in the medical field that relate. For example, the paragraphs are short and start with phrases like “On the other hand”, “Returning to”, “Suppose”, these are all phrases where the author is going back and forth, while creating an atmosphere for the reader, as if one was actually there. Doyal is constantly making the reader think, to put themselves in the position of others, by simply saying “we need to ask what makes…”. This makes the reader feel included, and more intrigued to what he has to say next. Doyal does this throughout the entirety of his article. In the end after explaining the different concepts, and scenarios he comes back to his original scenario of Dianne Pretty and asks another question. His structure is immaculate he presents a scenario, informs the reader of details regarding that scenario, while using an understandable vocabulary for his audience and wraps it up in the end with the same scenario, in hopes that what he has presented, was heard. When he presents Diane Pretty, he describes what she suffers from and what she is experiencing, and it does not sound like anything, anyone would want to go through. The reason he does this is so that the readers can empathize with Pretty, this is part of the rhetorical triangle called “pathos” appealing to the reader emotions, to further comprehend his argument.

             Doyal presents his ideas with logical reasoning behind them. This is known as logos in the rhetorical triangles, the idea of incorporating proof and logical reasoning, which also adds to his credibility. He states, “If passively ending the life of severely incompetent patients is legally and professionally acceptable then involuntary active euthanasia should have the same status” addressing the fact that doctors are legally allowed to stop life sustaining treatments when these treatments are no longer beneficial or “too much of a burden”. Loyal adds that doctors are allowed to end a patient’s life passively, so why should Pretty not be able to do so actively. He questions: what is so morally wrong about not wanting to suffer? This demonstrates that he has looked into other procedures that happen in the medical field in regard to a patient’s death, aside from simply stating facts about euthanasia the author aids the reader to see it from a different perspective taking into consideration other facts.  At the end of the article Loyal also includes references, which build up to his credibility as many come from Cambridge University, Oxford University and so on.

            Throughout the entire article Doyal does not lose focus of what his purpose is, through the use of tone. His tone is extremely informative, while yet creating this conversational tone between different thoughts, and information being said. Doyal is targeting those in the medical field, as well as any regular person, who feel that euthanasia is morally wrong. He is constantly juggling between what seems to be “moral” according to the law. For example, Doyal provides his audience with a paragraph explaining how a patient is considered “unable to benefit from further life itself” and how the doctors than commence the process of withdrawing treatments to protect the patients. In the paragraph that follows Doyal does not directly question but has that kind of “well hey if that’s done in the best interest for the patients, then why is morality tied into it” type of tone, which make the audience question their own beliefs. Doyal’s tone keep the reader on their toes, because he successfully engages the reader, as if one had to really make that decision. 

            The author of this article intelligently incorporates a real-life example of something he feels strongly about, to engage the reader while successfully getting his point across. Doyal appeals to the emotions of the reader by making one feel empathy for Pretty, to understand that because of a law she has to continue suffering. Additionally, Doyal has written a series of articles, which adds to his credibility, allowing the audience to feel safe about what is being said. What really completed this article was the structure, tone and vocabulary that Doyal chose to use. All pieces of the rhetorical triangle were incorporated throughout this article, Doyal is very credible, he appeals to the authors emotions, and he provides reasoning and logic behind his argument.