Abstract
There exists support for euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide (PAS) in cases of terminal cancer. One of the premises for this approach is the goal of the alleviation of suffering. Do current means of pain control in the greater overall setting of palliative care serve as a desirable alternative? A contrast comparison may be drawn between the above approaches using both theological and medical sources to show that the enlightened use of both interventional and non-interventional pain medicine approaches in an integrated palliative care setting are a theologically grounded and medically feasible alternative to euthanasia or PAS in this population.
Lay summary: Patients suffering from terminal cancer often have pain. Some have advocated euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide as a potential way of alleviating this suffering. Further examination of this topic, however, shows this approach may be essentially utilitarian and fail to consider the inherent value of human life. There has been significant development in recent years in the fields of pain medicine and palliative care, which afford alternate means of addressing suffering in this patient population.
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Michael Erdek
Michael Erdek M.D., is associate professor of anesthesiology and critical care medicine and oncology at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. Dr. Erdek received his undergraduate medical education at the University of Pennsylvania. He trained in surgery and in anesthesiology prior to completing his subspecialty training in pain medicine and critical care medicine at the Johns Hopkins University. Dr. Erdek has been appointed to the Polyanalgesic Consensus Panel, which formulates international recommendations for intraspinal drug delivery. He is a member of the editorial board of several journals in the field of pain medicine. His email address is [email protected].