This Article  • References  • 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  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Richard S. Kane, MD
Milwaukee, Wis

JAMA. 1991;265(17):2189.

	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.—

Dr Goodwin's analysis of euthanasia in "Mercy Killing: Mercy for Whom?"¹ was correct as far as it went. However, using the same type of argument, passive euthanasia also can be shown to be selfish on the part of the surrogate. Should the selfishness of mercy killing or any procedure really affect our decision making? What about making the opposite choice, to prolong life?

The norm of decision making today is autonomy, the right to decide for oneself. It may be that, without advance directives to guide them, all surrogate decisions made for the permanently and severely disabled are selfish. After all, the patient's self can no longer speak: it is the surrogate's self deciding. . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

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