This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

To the Editor: Drs Orentlicher and Caplan¹ described the Pain Relief Promotion Act of 1999 (PRPA) as a " . . . serious threat to palliative care." They were concerned about interference by the federal government with state authority and speculated that such legislation would inhibit good palliative care and pain relief.

I would like to share a different perspective from a hospice physician who has been active in pain promotion in Maryland where the state has passed (despite similar misleading arguments as those of Orentlicher and Caplan) legislation banning physician-assisted suicide with wording to promote good pain management,¹ similar to that seen in the bill recently passed by the US House of Representatives.¹ The reason that the Maryland version became law with bipartisan support (despite the fact that Maryland is arguably the most liberal state in the Union²) had to do with specific wording that provided protection for . . . [Full Text of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLE

The Pain Relief Promotion Act of 1999: A Serious Threat to Palliative Care
David Orentlicher and Arthur Caplan
JAMA. 2000;283(2):255-258.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT