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

Harold Y. Vanderpool, PhD
Institute for the Medical Humanities University of Texas Medical Branch Galveston

JAMA. 1988;259(14):2094.

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

To the Editor.

—The story entitled "It's Over, Debbie"¹ raises profoundly troubling ethical issues—the more so because its sentimental surface masks a dark and worrisome underside.

On the surface of the story, a hassled but resolutely caring resident physician ends the hollow-eyed suffering of a young woman named Debbie by putting a stop to the cruel, "gallows"-like technology that mocks her youth and former vitality.

Just beneath the surface of these heartwarming themes lies the real point of the story—that in cases like this it is ethical for physicians to kill patients. Unfortunately, "It's Over, Debbie" only disguises and distorts the debate and clarification that are necessary for a moral assessment of mercy killing. First, the story's rhetoric (which is equated with the way the physician thinks) masks the act of killing Debbie with such euphemisms as doing one's "job," giving Debbie the "rest" she needs, and enabling her . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Footnotes
Edited by Drummond Rennie, MD, Senior Contributing Editor; Sharon Iverson, Assistant Editor.

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