The case against physician assisted suicide

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Physician assisted suicide (PAS) engenders debate about the meaning of professional identity, what is proper in the doctor/patient relationship, and the physician's appropriate role in society. Polarization on PAS largely arises from different views on what defines compassion in relieving pain and suffering, and the proper balance between individual autonomy and social imperatives. This paper discusses the ethical, social and economic arguments against PAS, including a historical perspective on other socially-sanctioned inappropriate uses of medical technology and expertise. This paper maintains that a truly dignified death does not come at the hand of a physician-healer, despite compelling arguments that it is a compassionate act.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)5-14
Number of pages10
JournalCommunity Mental Health Journal
Volume35
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - 1999

Fingerprint

Assisted Suicide
assisted suicide
physician
Physician's Role
Psychological Stress
Hand
Economics
medical technology
Technology
Physicians
Pain
polarization
pain
expertise
autonomy
death
economics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychiatry and Mental health
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Health(social science)
  • Health Professions(all)

Cite this

The case against physician assisted suicide. / Boehnlein, James.

In: Community Mental Health Journal, Vol. 35, No. 1, 1999, p. 5-14.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{72d21fe877ee430a8c5cf0a6e4ff8759,
title = "The case against physician assisted suicide",
abstract = "Physician assisted suicide (PAS) engenders debate about the meaning of professional identity, what is proper in the doctor/patient relationship, and the physician's appropriate role in society. Polarization on PAS largely arises from different views on what defines compassion in relieving pain and suffering, and the proper balance between individual autonomy and social imperatives. This paper discusses the ethical, social and economic arguments against PAS, including a historical perspective on other socially-sanctioned inappropriate uses of medical technology and expertise. This paper maintains that a truly dignified death does not come at the hand of a physician-healer, despite compelling arguments that it is a compassionate act.",
author = "James Boehnlein",
year = "1999",
doi = "10.1023/A:1018739807708",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "35",
pages = "5--14",
journal = "Community Mental Health Journal",
issn = "0010-3853",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The case against physician assisted suicide

AU - Boehnlein, James

PY - 1999

Y1 - 1999

N2 - Physician assisted suicide (PAS) engenders debate about the meaning of professional identity, what is proper in the doctor/patient relationship, and the physician's appropriate role in society. Polarization on PAS largely arises from different views on what defines compassion in relieving pain and suffering, and the proper balance between individual autonomy and social imperatives. This paper discusses the ethical, social and economic arguments against PAS, including a historical perspective on other socially-sanctioned inappropriate uses of medical technology and expertise. This paper maintains that a truly dignified death does not come at the hand of a physician-healer, despite compelling arguments that it is a compassionate act.

AB - Physician assisted suicide (PAS) engenders debate about the meaning of professional identity, what is proper in the doctor/patient relationship, and the physician's appropriate role in society. Polarization on PAS largely arises from different views on what defines compassion in relieving pain and suffering, and the proper balance between individual autonomy and social imperatives. This paper discusses the ethical, social and economic arguments against PAS, including a historical perspective on other socially-sanctioned inappropriate uses of medical technology and expertise. This paper maintains that a truly dignified death does not come at the hand of a physician-healer, despite compelling arguments that it is a compassionate act.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0032895392&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0032895392&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1023/A:1018739807708

DO - 10.1023/A:1018739807708

M3 - Article

C2 - 10094506

AN - SCOPUS:0032895392

VL - 35

SP - 5

EP - 14

JO - Community Mental Health Journal

JF - Community Mental Health Journal

SN - 0010-3853

IS - 1

ER -