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.
This chapter is largely based on Lee (2010).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
To qualify, a resident must make three requests (two verbal and one written), have two physicians and possibly a psychiatrist certify terminal illness and mental competency, and then wait at least 15 days before getting the medicine. See Oregon’s website for detailed instructions.
- 2.
Many more residents initiated the application, but did not follow through with it (Tolle et al. 2004).
- 3.
- 4.
My model is similar to the one that Posner (1995, pp. 245–250) uses in his analysis of suicide. Posner also assumes that a person faces two possible future states: “the doomed state” and “the healthy state.” In the doomed state, a person’s utility is negative.
- 5.
We may go even a step further. Knowing that the medicine is available at the local pharmacy for the asking, we may not bother to get it—since we know we probably would not use it.
References
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.
Coombs Lee, Barbara, ed. Compassion in Dying: Stories of Dignity and Choice. Troutdale: New Sage Press, 2003.
Gawande, Atul. Being Mortal: Medicine and What Matters in the End. Farmington Hills, MI: Gale Cengage Learning, 2014.
Hamermesh, Daniel S., and Neal M. Soss. “An Economic Theory of Suicide.” Journal of Political Economy, 82 (1), 1974, pp. 83–98.
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.
Lee, Li Way, “The Oregon Paradox.” Journal of Socio-Economics, 39 (2), April 2010, pp. 204–208.
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.
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.
Posner, Richard A. Aging and Old Age. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1995.
Preston, Tom. Patient-Directed Dying: A Call for Legalized Aid in Dying for the Terminally Ill. New York: iUniverse Star, 2007.
Quill, Timothy E. “Death and Dignity: A Case of Individualized Decision Making.” New England Journal of Medicine, 324, 1991, pp. 691–694.
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.
Terman, Stanley A. The Best Way to Say Goodbye: A Legal Peaceful Choice at the End of Life. Carlsbad: Life Transitions Publications, 2007.
Thaler, Richard H. “Toward a Positive Theory of Consumer Choice.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 1, 1980, pp. 39–60.
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.
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.
Zitter, Jessica. Extreme Measures: Finding a Better Path to the End of Life. New York: Avery, an Imprint of Penguin Random House, 2017.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lee, L.W. (2018). The Oregon Paradox. In: Behavioral Economics and Bioethics. Palgrave Advances in Behavioral Economics. Palgrave Pivot, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-89779-0_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-89779-0_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Pivot, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-89778-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-89779-0
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)