Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa

The Good Death, Virtue, and Physician-Assisted Death: An Examination of the Hospice Way of Death

  • Franklin G. Miller (a1)

The problem of physician-assisted death (PAD), assisted suicide and active euthanasia, has been debated predominantly in the ethically familiar vocabulary of rights, duties, and consequences. Patient autonomy and the right to die with dignity vie with the duty of physicians to heal, but not to kill, and the specter of “the slippery slope” from voluntary euthanasia as a last resort for patients suffering from terminal illness to PAD on demand and mercy killing of “hopeless” incompetent patients. Another dimension of the debate over PAD concerns the evaluative question of what constitutes a good death. At stake are Issues of character and virtue in the face of death and dying and their Implications for legitimizing the practice of PAD. Critics of PAD argue that “natural” death in the context of comfort care, as provided by hospice programs, is the good death. In contrast, PAD amounts to an easy way out, an evasion of the ultimate human challenge and task of dying. Because hospice care is clearly preferable to PAD, the former should be encouraged and the latter remain prohibited.

Hide All

1. Miller FG, Fletcher JC. The case for legalized Euthanasia. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 1993;36:159–76.

2. Nuland SB. How We Die. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1994.

3. See note 2, 1994: xvi.

4. Stoddard S. The Hospice Movement. Rev. ed.New York: Vintage, 1992;Cundiff D. Euthanasia Is Not the Answer. Totowa, New Jersey: Humana Press, 1992;Miller RJ. Hospice care as an alternative to euthanasia. Law, Medicine & Health 1992;20:127–32;Post SG. American culture and good death. In: Inquiries in Bioethics. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 1993:7993.

5. See note 4. Miller. 1994:132.

6. See note 4. Post. 1993:79.

7. Pellegrino E. Doctors must not kill. The Journal of Clinical Ethics 1992;3:97.

8. Miller FG. Is active killing of patients always wrong? Journal of Clinical Ethics 1991;2:130–2;Quill TE. Death and dignity: a case of individualized decision making. New England Journal of Medicine 1991;324:691–4.

9. See note 8. Quill. 1991:693.

10. Mill JS. On liberty. In: Everyman's Library. London: J.M. Dent, 1971:125.

11. Byock IR. Kevorkian: right problem, wrong solution. The Washington Post 1994;01 17:A23.

12. Bernat JL, Gert B, Mogielnicki RP. Patient refusal of hydration and nutrition. Archives of Internal Medicine 1993;153:2713–28.

13. Gay P. Freud. New York: Norton, 1988:649.

14. See note 13. Gay. 1988:651.

15. Kleinman A. The Illness Narratives. New York: Basic Books, 1988:154.

16. See note 4. Cundiff. 1992:61.

17. Strauss D. The liberal virtues. In: Chapman JW, Galston WA, eds. Virtue. New York: New York University Press, 1992:200–1.

18. Macedo S. Liberal Virtues. New York: Oxford University Press, 1990:233.

19. See note 10. Mill. 1971.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics
  • ISSN: 0963-1801
  • EISSN: 1469-2147
  • URL: /core/journals/cambridge-quarterly-of-healthcare-ethics
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *


Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 10 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 129 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 24th October 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.