Ethical questions about end-of-life treatment present
themselves at two levels. In clinical situations, patients,
families, and healthcare workers sift through ambivalent
feelings and conflicting values as they try to resolve
questions in particular circumstances. In a very different
way, at the societal level, policy makers, lawyers, and
bioethicists attempt to determine the best policies and
laws to regulate practices about which there are a variety
of deeply held beliefs. In the United States we have tried
a number of ways to resolve the societal-level issues.
We have ignored them, argued to try to convince others
of our beliefs, voted to let the majority determine what
is right or wrong, and turned to the courts to decide,
as in the cases of Karen Ann Quinlan, Nancy Cruzan, and
Jack Kervorkian. Yet none of these approaches has yet left
us with comfortable, unambiguous cultural norms about issues
such as euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide, which
are readily assumed by “ordinary people” as
they face individual and interpersonal dilemmas.
Physician Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia: Safeguarding Against the "Slippery Slope" The Netherlands v. The United States
