Ezekiel J. Emanuel, distinguished oncologist and bioethicist, a vice provost at the University of Pennsylvania, chair of the Department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, an author and editor in the health care field, wants to die at age 75. Why would he make such a decision in what many would see as the prime of his life?
This post looks critically at the view that Medical Aid In Dying (MAID) is not a human right.
Seth Andrews–The Thinking Atheist–discusses death and end-of-life issues from his perspective.
You may not have heard of the Disability Integration Act of 2019, but it is worth the support of the Final Exit Network (FEN) and the individual support of all people who favor a self-controlled death
End-of-life pain can be complex and not all such pain is easily or satisfactorily controlled. FEN member Craig Phillips shares his experiences with pain control while working as a volunteer in a hospice.
Lamar Hankins discusses how the disabled are devalued and prevented from having the same rights non-disabled people have. What a person considers a fulfilling life should be decided by each person, not by the opinion of any other person, including by someone who is disabled.
In this third part of a series analyzing the arguments against medical-assistance-in-dying (MAID) by opponents of physician-assistance in hastening a person’s death in the face of a terminal illness, Lamar Hankins looks at a major reference for most MAID opposition articles – a 2008 Michigan Law Review article, “Physician-Assisted Suicide in Oregon: A Medical Perspective,” by psychiatrist Herbert Hendin and neurologist Kathleen Foley. Both oppose what they term “assisted suicide.”
No, it is not an obituary for a specific individual. It is an obituary that recognizes and celebrates taking control of one’s end-of-life suffering.
When a family member provides care in the home for someone with a disability, when does this responsibility become a burden on the caregiver? Is being a burden asking too much of a family member? These and related questions are discussed in this week’s post.
This National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine sponsored a workshop last week that was intended to explore the evidence base and research gaps relating to the implementation of the clinical practice of allowing terminally ill patients to access life-ending medications with the aid of a physician. The workshop examined what is known, and unknown, about how physician-assisted death is practiced and accessed in the United States; it was not to be a focus of the workshop to discuss at length the moral or ethical arguments for or against the practice of physician-assisted death. It was billed as a neutral space to facilitate dialogue in order to help inform ongoing discussions between patients, their providers, and other health care stakeholders. What follows is a report on that workshop.