Action v. Inaction; Intend v. Allow

[lawtonfogle]

Is it morally (or ethically) worse for one to cause some amount of harm by action than to allow the same amount of harm by inaction?

Is it morally (or ethically) worse for one to, by action or inaction, have some amount of harm be the goal of the action or inaction than it is for the same amount of harm to be an accepted side effect of action or inaction?

 

[PhilosophicalBluster]

Not the same. Example: CPR

When conducting CPR, one must depress the sternum fairly hard in order to jog the heart. In this process, ribs can be broken, which can also kill the person you are doing CPR on, if the ribs go into the heart or other vital organs.

Whereas, if you had not performed CPR, you do not risk killing them yourself, but the person will die because of your inaction, which I think shifts the blame more towards you than trying and failing.