Should The Essay 'Should Doctor' End People's Lives?

In the section 1.7 “Should Doctor’s End People’s Lives?” the first argument is protector and the other one is euthanizer. Protector point of view is that if a patient goes to the doctor and ask to do a life threating surgery that could end your life in a few day or it could make you better. So the people are going to think to do the surgery so that the illness goes away and you live your life, and there is always hope to get better. Euthanizer point of view is that if you have a life threating illness and you have a choice to do the surgery or not to because most likely you are going to die from the surgery. And the doctor suggest not to do the surgery and just die slowly because you won’t suffer the pain through surgery, and also save the doctor’s time.
Meaning that people should do the right thing by helping people when they need help and to have hope for them. In protector argument the kid needed surgery but the surgery was life threating to do, but there was a little chance that kid would have survive if you gave him hope. Utilitarian say that happiness is the basis of moral judgments and feelings. So do the things that makes you happy. And should act and hope for the best, in the situation with the little boy parents and the doctor should take the best decision for the little kid. Utilitarianism is typically based on hedonism. Hedonist argue that the highest goal that people could have is pleasure, which is the only worthwhile goal. I think that hedonist fall under euthanizer because both believe that pain is bad and nobody should suffer the