Advertisement

The Oregon Paradox

  • Li Way Lee
Chapter
Part of the Palgrave Advances in Behavioral Economics book series (PABE)

Abstract

When terminally ill people are given the option of legally hastening death, they often feel a sense of greater well-being and a desire to live longer. In my explanation of this paradox, a terminally ill person has two selves. The right-to-die empowers the future self to gain control of suffering at the end of life. That makes the present self, who has empathy with the future self, feel a surge in well-being and the desire to live a longer life.

Keywords

Right to die Death with Dignity Act Present self Future self Well-being 

References

  1. Angell, Marcia. “The Quality of Mercy.” In Timothy Quill and Margaret P. Battin, eds. Physician-Assisted Dying: The Case for Palliative Care and Patient Choice. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2004, pp. 15–23.Google Scholar
  2. Coombs Lee, Barbara, ed. Compassion in Dying: Stories of Dignity and Choice. Troutdale: New Sage Press, 2003.Google Scholar
  3. Gawande, Atul. Being Mortal: Medicine and What Matters in the End. Farmington Hills, MI: Gale Cengage Learning, 2014.Google Scholar
  4. Hamermesh, Daniel S., and Neal M. Soss. “An Economic Theory of Suicide.” Journal of Political Economy, 82 (1), 1974, pp. 83–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Kahneman, Daniel, Jack L. Knetsch, and Richard H. Thaler. “The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias.” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5 (1), 1991, pp. 193–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Lee, Li Way, “The Oregon Paradox.” Journal of Socio-Economics, 39 (2), April 2010, pp. 204–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Lynn, Joanne, and David M. Adamson. “Living Well at the End of Life: Adapting Health Care to Serious Chronic Illness in Old Age.” RAND Health White Papers, Santa Monica, California, 2003.Google Scholar
  8. Pearlman, Robert, and Helene Starks. “Why Do People Seek Physician-Assisted Death?” In Timothy E. Quill and Margaret P. Battin, eds. Physician-Assisted Dying: The Case for Palliative Care and Patient Choice. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2004, pp. 91–101.Google Scholar
  9. Posner, Richard A. Aging and Old Age. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1995.Google Scholar
  10. Preston, Tom. Patient-Directed Dying: A Call for Legalized Aid in Dying for the Terminally Ill. New York: iUniverse Star, 2007.Google Scholar
  11. Quill, Timothy E. “Death and Dignity: A Case of Individualized Decision Making.” New England Journal of Medicine, 324, 1991, pp. 691–694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Quill, Timothy E., and Margaret P. Battin, eds. Physician-Assisted Dying: The Case for Palliative Care and Patient Choice. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2004.Google Scholar
  13. Terman, Stanley A. The Best Way to Say Goodbye: A Legal Peaceful Choice at the End of Life. Carlsbad: Life Transitions Publications, 2007.Google Scholar
  14. Thaler, Richard H. “Toward a Positive Theory of Consumer Choice.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 1, 1980, pp. 39–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Tolle, Susan W., Virginia P. Tilden, Linda L. Drach, Erik K. Fromme, Nancy A. Perrin, and Katrina Hedberg. “Characteristics and Proportion of dying Oregonians Who Personally Consider Physician-Assisted Suicide.” The Journal of Clinical Ethics, 15 (2), 2004, pp. 111–122.Google Scholar
  16. Yang, Bijou, and David Lester. “A Prolegomenon to Behavioral Economic Studies of Suicide.” In Morris Altman, ed. Handbook of Contemporary Behavioral Economics. Armonk, NY: Sharpe, 2006, pp. 543–559.Google Scholar
  17. Zitter, Jessica. Extreme Measures: Finding a Better Path to the End of Life. New York: Avery, an Imprint of Penguin Random House, 2017.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Wayne State UniversityDetroitUSA

Personalised recommendations