[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.205.0.26. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Article
March 1997

Managed Care and Managed DeathCoincidence

Author Affiliations

From the World Federation of Neurology Research Group on Medical Education and the Departments of Medicine and Neurology, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, New Brunswick.

Arch Neurol. 1997;54(3):328-330. doi:10.1001/archneur.1997.00550150084021
Abstract

Toward the end of his famous and nearly incomprehensible book, The Critique of Pure Reason, Immanuel Kant underscored the 3 most important questions in philosophic thought: What can I know? What ought I to do? What may I hope? The modal auxiliaries can, ought, and may in these questions are precisely used, implying, respectively, that what is knowable by humans will always be limited, that the path to virtuous conduct is always uncertain, and that our dreams and plans become hopes because of a Being whose verdicts we can neither predict nor appeal.1 The subjects of assisted suicide and euthanasia highlighted in this article fall firmly in the domain of philosophy, even though they are usually debated as questions of social policy and law. The issue is not only what we have a right to do, but also what it is right for us to do. I will argue

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview
×