English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

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.

Pain Medicine and Palliative Care as an Alternative to Euthanasia in End-of-Life Cancer Care