In Western thought, suicide has evolved from sin to sin-and-crime, to crime, to mental illness, and to semilegal act. A legal act is one we are free to think and speak about and plan and perform, without penalty by agents of the state. While dying voluntarily is ostensibly legal, suicide attempts and even suicidal thoughts are routinely punished by incarceration in a psychiatric institution. Although many people believe the prevention of suicide is one of the duties the modern state owes its citizens, Szasz argues that suicide is a basic human right and that the lengths to which the medical industry goes to prevent it represent a deprivation of that right. Drawing on his general theory of the myth of mental illness, Szasz makes a compelling case that the voluntary termination of one's own life is the result of a decision, not a disease. He presents an in-depth examination and critique of contemporary antisuicide policies, which are based on the notion that voluntary death is a mental health problem, and systematically lays out the dehumanizing consequences of psychiatrizing suicide prevention. If suicide be deemed a problem, it is not a medical problem. Managing it as if it were a disease, or the result of a disease, will succeed only in debasing medicine and corrupting the law. Pretending to be the pride of medicine, psychiatry is its shame.

Citizen Killings: Liberalism, State Policy and Moral Risk offers a ground breaking systematic approach to formulating ethical public policy on all forms of 'citizen killings', which include killing in self-defence, abortion, infanticide, assisted suicide, euthanasia and killings carried out by private military contractors and so-called 'foreign fighters'. Where most approaches to these issues begin with the assumptions of some or other general approach to ethics, Deane-Peter Baker argues that life-or-death policy decisions of this kind should be driven first and foremost by a recognition of the key limitations that a commitment to political liberalism places on the state, particularly the requirement to respect citizens' right to life and the principle of liberal neutrality. Where these principles come into tension Baker shows that they can in some cases be defused by way of a reasonableness test, and in other cases addressed through the application of what he calls the 'risk of harm principle'. The book also explores the question of what measures citizens and other states might legitimately take in response to states that fail to implement morally appropriate policies regarding citizen killings.

In court cases, policy studies and media stories, euthanasia advocates claim that Belgium's euthanasia records are complete and transparent. The official euthanasia story from Belgium has been accepted at face value by the authors of these influential reports and court decisions; the Royal Society of Canada End-of-Life Decision Making report; the Quebec Select Committee on Dying with Dignity report; the Commission on Assisted Dying report - UK the BC Supreme Court Justice Lynn Smith: Carter decision.

In "The Case against Assisted Suicide: For the Right to End-of-Life Care," Dr. Kathleen Foley and Dr. Herbert Hendin uncover why pleas for patient autonomy and compassion, often used in favor of legalizing euthanasia, do not advance or protect the rights of terminally ill patients. Incisive essays by authorities in the fields of medicine, law, and bioethics draw on studies done in the Netherlands, Oregon, and Australia by the editors and contributors that show the dangers that legalization of assisted suicide would pose to the most vulnerable patients. Thoughtful and persuasive, this book urges the medical profession to improve palliative care and develop a more humane response to the complex issues facing those who are terminally ill.

How veterinarians and pet owners manage companion animal euthanasia.

Michael J. Hyde's pathbreaking study considers the relationship between the phenomenon of conscience and the practice of rhetoric as it relates to one of the most controversial issues of our time-euthanasia. Hyde investigates how the practice of rhetoric becomes a voice of conscience and influences the moral standards of individuals and communities. In doing so, he offers the first extensive treatment of Martin Heidegger's and Emmanuel Levinas's philosophical investigations of conscience and an in-depth analysis of the justifiability and social acceptability of euthanasia. Hyde establishes the theoretical basis of his study by discussing and critically assessing the phenomenological theories of conscience set forth in the works of the two philosophers. To illustrate in concrete terms how the relationship between the call of conscience and the practice of rhetoric shows itself in everyday existence, Hyde surveys the moral discourse that informs ongoing debates over euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. He focuses on a cluster of related topics that emerge from his discussion of the work of Heidegger and Levinas, including the phenomena of deconstruction and acknowledgment, emotion and the reconstructive power of language, and the discursive creation of heroes. Through these investigations Hyde accounts for some of the key definitions, arguments, and narratives that contribute to the rhetoric of the euthanasia debate, especially as the discussion has evolved since the late 1980s.

After the Nancy Cruzan case was decided by the Supreme Court in 1990, and ultimately resolved by the Courts of the State of Missouri, the decision to withhold or withdraw life-prolonging nutrition and hydration appeared to many to be as noncontroversial as decisions to refuse respirators or dialysis. Even the Catholic Church held that, although there should be a presumption in favor of providing nutrition and hydration, the patient or the patient's surrogate could overrule this presumption, if either believed the treatment was disproportionate or burdensome. The Schiavo case changed all that. Although the decision to remove Terri Schiavo's nutrition and hydration was made by her husband - her legal surrogate - based on his wife's belief that such treatment was disproportionate, Schiavo's immediate family protested so much that the case took years to resolve. It eventually involved all branches of government at both the state and federal levels. The ethical dilemmas that such cases pose continue to stir great controversy. This in-depth examination of these dilemmas provides information and documentation from many perspectives. The editors have included a foreword by Dr. Jay Wolfson, Terri Schiavo's court-appointed guardian ad litem, as well as Dr. Wolfson's report to Gov. Jeb Bush on the case and Gov. Bush's reply; public statements by President George Bush and Senators David Weldon, Rick Santorum, Tom DeLay, Bill Frist, and Barney Frank; statements by the pope and other representatives of the Catholic Church on this issue; plus much medical and legal background material on both precedents to the Schiavo case and its aftermath, including the results of the autopsy report. For anyone wishing an in-depth understanding of these complex ethical issues, issues many of us will have to confront in our own families, this volume is indispensable.

Controversy about the morality of euthanasia and assisted suicide and their legalisation has been running for over a generation, and it shows no sign of flagging. The main arguments for and against are widely familiar, yet the horizon yields no sign of any approaching resolution. Progress can still be made by careful examination of the opposing fronts and that is the service that this book performs. Drawing ecumenically on both theological and philosophical resources, it pioneers an original way to a mature judgement by tackling the three basic questions that the debate raises: What is it that makes human life valuable? Can it ever be moral to intend to kill someone? And how much should we fear the wider, social effects of legalising euthanasia or assisted suicide?

"Mercy killing," "assisting a suicide," "planning your own death," and "euthanasia" are once again high-profile issues. Recent popular referendums have sought to legalize doctor-assisted suicide, while best-selling books have been published about how to kill yourself. In short, Americans are searching for more control over their own mortality.
Hemlock's Cup is the first history of the active euthanasia movement in America, as represented by its most visible proponent, the Hemlock Society. Donald W. Cox traces the growth of the society from its beginnings as a three-person cause to its current world-wide fame. The work of Derek Humphrey, the society's founder, is reviewed and the publicity surrounding Dr. Jack Kevorkian and his controversial "suicide machine" is discussed.
Cox also addresses the Washington and California initiatives to legalize doctor-assisted suicide and the ethical questions they pose. He reflects on the impact of the Quinlan and Cruzan cases to establish the "right to die" for all Americans and he explores the reasons for the delays in enacting living-will laws in various states. In addition, Cox examines the significant connections among AIDS, abortion, and assisted suicide.

Patricia Rosier died at her home in Fort Myers, Florida, in January of 1986, having sought the help of her prominent physician husband, Peter, to end her cancer-ravaged life with some measure of dignity. By November 1987, Peter had been indicted for first degree murder and faced death in Florida's electric chair. How could it happen? How does a loving husband and father get charged with first degree murder? This compelling true story shows just how easy it is in America's legal system. "Euthanasia" remains a crime in Florida and in most other states, yet the majority of such "criminals" are never prosecuted. But Dr. Rosier was singled out because he "confessed", both in a television interview and in writing, to believing in euthanasia and to assisting his wife's suicide. In Murder of Mercy every heart-pounding moment of Dr. Rosier's legal ordeal is vividly captured by famed trial attorney Stanley M. Rosenblatt, who, together with his wife and law partner, Susan, represented the accused. Describing an intriguing array of legal twists and turns, this riveting book is more than just gripping courtroom drama. Find out why Patricia's father and brothers sought immunity before they would testify. Feel the rush, the exhilaration, of planning defense strategy: How could anyone explain away Dr. Rosier's confessions? Could the Fort Myers judge be persuaded to change the location of the trial? Should Peter Rosier testify in his own defense? The powerful arguments of the State and the defense are laced with ridicule, sarcasm, and scorn: each side accusing the other of treacherous character assassination. Rosenblatt's penetrating assessment of judges, the use of expert witnesses, the exclusion ofrelevant evidence, attorney-client privilege, and the granting of immunity serve as the foundation for a searing critique of America's criminal justice system and the society it is designed to protect.

Why we all deserve a life worth living and a death worth dying for 'Most men don't fear death. They fear those things - the knife, the shipwreck, the illness, the bomb - which precede, by microseconds if you're lucky, and many years if you're not, the moment of death.' When Terry Pratchett was diagnosed with Alzheimer's in his fifties he was angry - not with death but with the disease that would take him there, and with the suffering disease can cause when we are not allowed to put an end to it. In this essay, broadcast to millions as the BBC Richard Dimblebly Lecture 2010 and previously only available as part of A Slip of the Keyboard, he argues for our right to choose - our right to a good life, and a good death too.

For many years Dr. Kevorkian was at the center of the red-hot debate over physician-assisted suicide. The inventor of the "suicide machine" stirred up both admiration and controversy. His "Deaths with Dignity" won him the accolades of the pro-choice movement. Other groups, like Operation Rescue, the AMA, the Hemlock Society, and especially the Michigan State Legislature, insisted that Kevorkian had gone too far. His much-publicized campaign to assist the terminally ill to commit suicide eventually led to his prosecution and imprisonment.
In Prescription: Medicide, the famed "suicide doctor" talks about why he was so committed to his struggle. He addresses the need to assist the terminally ill to die, how death row inmates should be allowed to donate organs after their deaths, and the need for medical reform to create a rational program of dignified, humane, beneficial planned death.

This book is an attempt to deal with the basic issues that surround the euthanasia debate. The subject is important, controversial, and complex, calling for sensitivity to the realities of death and dying, a clear understanding of one's Christian faith and its implications for this significant dimension of human existence, conceptual and analytical skills to deftly make the requisite distinctions along the way, and logical rigor to enable one to draw the appropriate conclusions.

The issue of physician-assisted death is now firmly on the American public agenda. Already legal in five states, it is the subject of intense public opinion battles across the country. Driven by an increasingly aging population, and a baby boom generation just starting to enter its senior years, the issue is not going to go away anytime soon. In Physician-Assited Death L.W. Sumner equips readers with everything they need to know to take a reasoned and informed position in this important debate. The book provides needed context for the debate by situating physician-assisted death within the wider framework of end-of-life care and explaining why the movement to legalize it now enjoys such strong public support. It also reviews that movement's successes to date, beginning in Oregon in 1994 and now extending to eleven jurisdictions across three continents. Like abortion, physician-assisted death is ethically controversial and the subject of passionately held opinions. The central chapters of the book review the main arguments utilized by both sides of the controversy: on the one hand, appeals to patient autonomy and the relief of suffering, on the other the claim that taking active steps to hasten death inevitably violates the sanctity of life. The book then explores both the case in favor of legalization and the case against, focusing in the latter instance on the risk of abuse and the possibility of slippery slopes. In this context the experience of jurisdictions that have already taken the step of legalization is carefully reviewed to see what lessons might be extracted from it. It then identifies some further issues that lie beyond the boundaries of the current debate but will have to be faced sometime down the road: euthanasia for patients who are permanently unconscious or have become seriously demented and for severely compromised newborns. The book concludes by considering the various possible routes to legalization, both political and judicial. Readers will then be prepared to decide for themselves just where they stand when they confront the issue both in their own jurisdiction and in their own lives.

Assisted dying is still an extremely contested topic in Bioethics. Despite the strongly influential role human dignity plays in this debate, it still has not received the appropriate, multi-faceted treatment it deserves. Studies show that the notion of dignity already plays an important role in medical contexts: it is frequently used by health care professionals as well as patients. However, its use in these contexts needs to be analyzed and explained in more detail. Moreover, a review of the available literature clearly shows that the general, highly fruitful academic debate on human dignity is more than ready to take the next step into applied ethics: in particular, into the even more controversial area of assisted death. This book offers a detailed philosophical analysis of dignity and how it relates to assisted death. Its audience will benefit both from the general discussion of human dignity it offers as well as from the specific bioethical context to which it is applied.

People in serious illness, crises, suffering and grief are particularly vulnerable in their reliance on the support and help of others. Therefore, all full-time and voluntary workers involved should always reflect ethically on their offers and their actions towards them in order not to "run over" them in their dependency, not to exploit them or even to enrich themselves with them. It is always important to respect the values of the sick, suffering person, to respect his dignity. Practiced ethics lead to pausing in everyday life and then to systematic, discursive reflection on the often opposing values of care and autonomy. Doing no additional damage to sufferers should be taken for granted, but everyone knows counterexamples. Special ethical challenges arise in the treatment and support of suffering people with regard to fairness in the distribution of resources, for example with people from other cultures, with seriously ill people whose hope is to be supported without senseless (possibly self-paid) treatment attempts, as well in observing the wishes of the dying. And how does the volunteer companion deal with cross-border behavior in interaction? What ethical considerations are important when advising believers of other religions? This booklet is dedicated to the importance of ethics in counseling, support and treatment of suffering people.

BOOK OF THE YEAR IN SPECTATOR AND TIMES 'Fascinating.... Deeply disturbing... Brilliant' Sunday Times 'Powerful and moving.' Louis Theroux Meet Adam. He's twenty-seven years old, articulate and attractive. He also wants to die. Should he be helped? And by whom? In The Inevitable, award-winning journalist Katie Engelhart explores one of our most abiding taboos: assisted dying. From Avril, the 80-year-old British woman illegally importing pentobarbital, to the Australian doctor dispensing suicide manuals online, Engelhart travels the world to hear the stories of those on the quest for a 'good death'. At once intensely troubling and profoundly moving, The Inevitable interrogates our most uncomfortable moral questions. Should a young woman facing imminent paralysis be allowed to end her life with a doctor's help? Should we be free to die painlessly before dementia takes our mind? Or to choose death over old age? A deeply reported portrait of everyday people struggling to make impossible decisions, The Inevitable sheds crucial light on what it means to flourish, live and die.

The coronavirus pandemic has made society's relationship with death and dying everybody's business. We have had to confront new challenges around the way we care for dying people, yet the old problems have not gone away. In February 2018, Dennis Eccleston, suffering in agony from terminal cancer, took an overdose of pain medication to end his own life, helped by his wife Mavis. Mavis was charged with murder. The turmoil that followed sheds light on the brutal impact of the UK's failure to legalise assisted dying. Sarah Wootton and Lloyd Riley of the campaign group Dignity in Dying argue that our laws and culture governing death and dying need radical reform and present a vision of what dying in the twenty-first century should look like. From votes for women to equal marriage, campaigners have had to fight for rights that now seem sacrosanct. As the pandemic now forces us to re-examine how we die, Wootton and Riley show how choice at the end of life is a right whose time has come. Bringing to light the heart-breaking testimony of those who have witnessed unimaginable suffering at the end of life and exposing the hypocrisy of the arguments put forward to oppose progress, Last Rights questions how future generations will judge us if we fail to take action and issues a call to arms for people to unlock their power and demand change.

This book argues against the legalisation of voluntary euthanasia and/or physician-assisted suicide on the ground that, even if they were ethically defensible in certain 'hard cases', neither could be effectively controlled by law. It maintains that the experience of legalisation in the Netherlands, Belgium and Oregon lends support to the two 'slippery slope' arguments against legalisation, the 'empirical' and the 'logical'. The empirical argument challenges the feasibility of drafting and enforcing adequate safeguards against abuse and mistake; the logical argument shows that acceptance of the case for euthanasia in the case of suffering patients who request it logically involves acceptance of euthanasia for suffering patients who are unable to request it, such as infants and those with advanced dementia.

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 believes that it should be sustained for 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. His study is an interdisciplinary, compelling study in medicine, law, religion, and ethics. With 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 why nonblood 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. Raphael Cohen-Almagor has been the Fulbright-Yitzhak Rabin Scholar and a visiting professor at UCLA School of Law and department of communication. He is chairperson of library and information studies at the University of Haifa, and the author of The Boundaries of Liberty and Tolerance, Speech, Media and Ethics: The Limits of Free Expression, and Euthanasia in the Netherlands.

Doctors, Patients, and Assisted Suicide
Revised and Updated Edition

A psychiatrist and world-famous authority on suicide offers a persuasive argument against legalizing assisted suicide in the United States.

Few issues set off such impassioned debate as euthanasia and assisted suicide, but until now, no one has shown what their practice means in the actual experience of patients, doctors, and families.

Herbert Hendin has studied such experience in the United States and also in the Netherlands, where assisted suicide and euthanasia are accepted. Using interviews with leading medical and legal architects of Dutch practices, and evaluating actual cases, Dr. Hendin addresses the difficult questions: Who actually makes the decision that a patient will die? How do the needs and character of family, friends, and doctors affect the choice? Throughout the book and in his conclusion, Dr. Hendin shows what we can do to find better options for those facing the final phase of life.

• "A powerful contribution to this debate."--Charles E. Rosenberg, New York Times Book Review
• "Closely reasoned and exhaustively researched. . . . Hendin's objections . . . carry a bone-chilling conviction."--Washington Post Book World
• "[An] important and alarming report." --Publishers Weekly (starred review)

The Supreme Court in America has ruled that states may prohibit physician-assisted suicide. This text assembles experts in the field of medical ethics to provide an account of the arguments for and against physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia, and for the historical, empirical and legal perspectives on this complicated issue. Questions are addressed here including: what does mercy dictate? is it a justification for killing? does physician-assisted suicide honour or violate autonomy? is it more dignified than natural death? is this decision purely a private matter? and will legalizing physician-assisted suicide put us on a slippery slop toward involuntary euthanasia? The text analyzes data taken from Holland, in an attempt to learn from the only country in which physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia are legal.

"For me Dr. Quill is a hero—a physician with a head and a heart." —Betty Rollin, author of Last Wish

This book looks squarely at how patients can make crucial decisions and take charge of the end of their lives. This book is a resource for anyone who fears unnecessary suffering and excessive medical intervention at that point. It helps readers think through and then complete advance directives, and also to take a more active role when they or a family member becomes terminally ill. Through real-life stories and his own experience, Dr. Quill explores what measures a patient can choose to prolong life and how to forgo such measures if they begin to extend a painful death, choosing instead approaches such as comfort care which emphasize quality more than quantity of life. Finally, Dr. Quill speaks out on physician-assisted suicide and why he helped a long-term patient of his, stricken with leukemia, to take her life when her suffering became intolerable. He asks for regulation, rather than denial, knowing that many patients and doctors ofen face this question at times of crisis.

"This book, written from the heart, is compassionate and emphatic. It makes a compelling argument for legalizing physician-assisted suicide." —D. W. Molloy, M.D., New England Journal of Medicine

"This is a work of enormous sensitivity, clarity, and caring. . . . It is essential reading for all those wishing to remain in control of their lives to the end." —Mack Lipkin, Jr., M.D., president, American Academy on Physician and Patient

"Quill's article . . . shocked the world . . . and caused him a great deal of persecution. This book eloquently explains his action and his beliefs." —Ann Waldron, Washington Post

"Quill's perceptive, emphatic exploration will help readers to make informed decisions in tragic situations." —Publishers Weekly

"A bold approach to medicine." —Gary. C. Rummier, Arizona Daily Star

This volume focuses on issues involving the inviolability of the human body and the decision to end life. The contributors explore the difficulties in framing a public policy that legalizes aid in dying, and return to the more general question of what is the most fair and effective relationship between private medical authority and public policy. In Part 1, biologists, ethicists, theologians and political scientists examine the issue of whether there ought to be limits to medical intervention. Although medicine has continually stretched the boundaries of intervention in the human body, new technologies of organ transplantation and genetics and the emergence of revolutionary drugs raise ethical concerns over how far we should go in moving from therapeutics to enhancement of the human body. Questions of inviolability also arise in situations where treatment of the foetus requires intrusion into the bodily integrity of the pregnant woman. The contributors debate what is meant by inviolability and where, if ever, it should be a matter of public policy. Part 2 brings together authors from bioethics, medicine, psychology, journalism and politics to examine the intensifying debate over the empowerment of patients in making decisions to end life.

Recent advances in medical technology have greatly increased physicians' ability to prolong life and have provoked widespread public concern regarding the rights of individuals to refuse treatment. The Right to Die analyzes the right to die as a controversial social and political issue and examines its development in contemporary public policy.