To the Editor.— According to Lundberg, 1 It's Over, Debbie 2 was published to stimulate thought and discussion about euthanasia. The resultant letters 3 and commentaries 4,5 show that this purpose has been served. But as if the euthanasia question was not complicated enough, the responses by some members of the medical profession, and several ethicists in particular, raise what is perhaps an even more troubling issue: the dogmatic approach often taken by physicians when their values differ from those of their patients. Some physicians seem unwilling or incapable of hearing the voices that echo around them. The problem is exemplified in the COMMENTARY 'Doctors Must Not Kill,' 4 in which four renowned medical ethicists speak in certain and absolute terms, as if they know what's right and what's wrong. But how can they be so sure? As Lundberg points out, there is no science of ethics, no database, no
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Aaron Spital (1988) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: