This post, Part 3 of a series on dementias directives, discusses the supplemental advance directive for dementia offered by Final Exit Network (FEN) for those people who do NOT want to live into the later stages of dementia. The FEN dementia directive was drafted by FEN’s legal counsel, Robert Rivas.
This post begins a multi-part series about dementia directives, analyzing their provisions and their purposes.
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 week’s post discusses the 2018 VSED death of Rosemary Bowen at age 94, based on the 16-minute film about her experience.
This week’s post includes two vignettes from the book “Extreme Measures: Finding a Better Path to the End of Life” by Dr. Jessica Nutik Zitter, MD, MPH. The book provides an insider’s view of intensive care in America and its impact on how we die. Part 2 will appear next week.
If we use “existential suffering” as a stand-in for all of the related terms we use, it will help us discuss what we may mean by them. Certainly, distress, dread, angst, anxiety, anguish, or crisis all suggest suffering at least in a mental or psychological sense, a kind of suffering that all people encounter at one point or another in their lives, or even daily. Some existential suffering can be mitigated through changes in circumstances or with the help of others, but when one is dying, whether slowly or rapidly, one may wish to forego the suffering whether or not there may be temporary relief for it.
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.”
This post lays out a process for making a dementia directive to be used when or if we become unable to make our own views known because of mental incapacity. If you are willing to live with dementia through the end of the disease, this post will not be of use to you.
In his 2006 book about death with dignity and the right to die (The Future of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia), Neil Gorsuch leveled several criticisms, by implication, against Oregon’s Death With Dignity Act (DWDA), a law that deals not at all with assisted suicide or euthanasia. Under the Oregon law, a person desiring a hastened death in the face of terminal illness may take his own life with a lethal prescription drug or drugs, unassisted by another person. Nevertheless, Gorsuch argues that we can’t determine the value of the DWDA for other jurisdictions without knowing how Oregon’s law is working in practice, and he asserts that we don’t have enough information about that.
The idea suggested by some disability rights advocates, that most of us will be disabled in one way or another by the time we reach the end of our lives, has been borne out in my experience. Virtually everyone I have known who has died has met, days or weeks or months before their deaths, the definition of disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act. How can we assure that those who are disabled are not coerced into ending their lives too soon?
