Providing a thorough, well-researched investigation of the socio-legal issues surrounding medically assisted death for the past century, this book traces the origins of the controversy and discusses the future of policymaking in this arena domestically and abroad. Should terminally ill adults be allowed to kill themselves with their physician's assistance? While a few American states—as well as Holland, Switzerland, Belgium, and Luxembourg—have answered "yes," in the vast majority of the United States, assisted death remains illegal. This book provides a historical and comparative perspective that not only frames contemporary debates about assisted death and deepens readers' understanding of the issues at stake, but also enables realistic predictions for the likelihood of the future diffusion of legalization to more countries or states—the consequences of which are vast. Spanning a period from 1906 to the present day, Dying with Dignity: A Legal Approach to Assisted Death examines how and why pleas for legalization of "euthanasia" made at the beginning of the 20th century were transmuted into the physician-assisted suicide laws in existence today, in the United States as well as around the world. After an introductory section that discusses the phenomenon of "medicalization" of death, author Giza Lopes, PhD, covers the history of the legal development of "aid-in-dying" in the United States, focusing on case studies from the late 1900s to today, then addresses assisted death in select European nations. The concluding section discusses what the past legal developments and decisions could portend for the future of assisted death.

Physician-Assisted Death is the eleventh volume of Biomedical Ethics Reviews. We, the editors, are pleased with the response to the series over the years and, as a result, are happy to continue into a second decade with the same general purpose and zeal. As in the past, contributors to projected volumes have been asked to summarize the nature of the literature, the prevailing attitudes and arguments, and then to advance the discussion in some way by staking out and arguing forcefully for some basic position on the topic targeted for discussion. For the present volume on Physician-Assisted Death, we felt it wise to enlist the services of a guest editor, Dr. Gregg A. Kasting, a practicing physician with extensive clinical knowledge of the various problems and issues encountered in discussing physician assisted death. Dr. Kasting is also our student and just completing a graduate degree in philosophy with a specialty in biomedical ethics here at Georgia State University. Apart from a keen interest in the topic, Dr. Kasting has published good work in the area and has, in our opinion, done an excellent job in taking on the lion's share of editing this well-balanced and probing set of essays. We hope you will agree that this volume significantly advances the level of discussion on physician-assisted euthanasia. Incidentally, we wish to note that the essays in this volume were all finished and committed to press by January 1993.

In this book the author makes a case for legalized physician-assisted dying. Using the latest data from Oregon and the Netherlands, he puts a new slant on perennial debate topics such as "slippery slopes," "the integrity of medicine," and "sanctity of life." This book provides an in-depth look at how we die in America today. It examines the shortcomings of our end-of-life system. You will learn about terminal torture in hospital ICUs and about the alternatives: hospice and palliative care. The author scrutinizes the good, the bad, and the ugly. He provides a critique of the practice of palliative sedation. The book makes a strong case that assisted dying complements hospice. By providing both, Oregon now has the best palliative-care system in America. This book, above all, may help you or someone you care about navigate this strange landscape we call "end of life." It can be an informed guide to "a good death" in the age of hospice and high-tech medical intervention.

“A remarkably nuanced, empathetic, and well-crafted work of journalism, [The Inevitable] explores what might be called the right-to-die underground, a world of people who wonder why a medical system that can do so much to try to extend their lives can do so little to help them end those lives in a peaceful and painless way.”—Brooke Jarvis, The New Yorker More states and countries are passing right-to-die laws that allow the sick and suffering to end their lives at pre-planned moments, with the help of physicians. But even where these laws exist, they leave many people behind. The Inevitable moves beyond margins of the law to the people who are meticulously planning their final hours—far from medical offices, legislative chambers, hospital ethics committees, and polite conversation. It also shines a light on the people who help them: loved ones and, sometimes, clandestine groups on the Internet that together form the “euthanasia underground.” Katie Engelhart, a veteran journalist, focuses on six people representing different aspects of the right to die debate. Two are doctors: a California physician who runs a boutique assisted death clinic and has written more lethal prescriptions than anyone else in the U.S.; an Australian named Philip Nitschke who lost his medical license for teaching people how to end their lives painlessly and peacefully at “DIY Death” workshops. The other four chapters belong to people who said they wanted to die because they were suffering unbearably—of old age, chronic illness, dementia, and mental anguish—and saw suicide as their only option. Spanning North America, Europe, and Australia, The Inevitable offers a deeply reported and fearless look at a morally tangled subject. It introduces readers to ordinary people who are fighting to find dignity and authenticity in the final hours of their lives.

Dying Right provides an overview of the Death With Dignity movement, a history of how and why Oregon legalized physician-assisted suicide, and an analysis of the future of physician-assisted suicide. Engaging the question of how to balance a patient's sense about the right way to die, a physician's role as a healer, and the state's interest in preventing killing, Dying Right captures the ethical, legal, moral, and medical complexities involved in this ongoing debate.

There are few issues more divisive than what has become known as "the right to die." One camp upholds "death with dignity," regarding the terminally ill as autonomous beings capable of forming their own judgment on the timing and process of dying. The other camp advocates "sanctity of life," regarding life as intrinsically valuable, and that should be sustained as long as possible. Is there a right answer? Raphael Cohen-Almagor takes a balanced approach in analyzing this emotionally charged debate, viewing the dispute from public policy and international perspectives. He offers an interdisciplinary, compelling study in medicine, law, religion, and ethics. It is a comprehensive look at the troubling question of whether physician-assisted suicide should be allowed. Cohen-Almagor delineates a distinction between active and passive euthanasia and discusses legal measures that have been invoked in the United States and abroad. He outlines reasons non-blood relatives should be given a role in deciding a patient's last wishes. As he examines euthanasia policies in the Netherlands and the 1994 Oregon Death with Dignity Act, the author suggests amendments and finally makes a circumscribed plea for voluntary physician-assisted suicide.

After assessing the strengths and weaknesses of arguments for assisted suicide and euthanasia, Gorsuch builds a nuanced, novel, and powerful moral and legal argument against legalization, one based on a principle that, surprisingly, has largely been overlooked in the debate; the idea that human life is intrinsically valuable and that intentional killing is always wrong. At the same time, the argument Gorsuch develops leaves wide latitude for individual patient autonomy and the refusal of unwanted medical treatment and life-sustaining care, permitting intervention only in cases where an intention to kill is present.