DOCSLIB.ORG

On Telling Dying Patients Thetruth

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
On Telling Dying Patients Thetruth J Med Ethics: first published as 10.1136/jme.8.3.115 on 1 September 1982. Downloaded from V, Journal ofmedical ethics, I982, 8, II5-II6 Editorial On telling dying patients the truth Dr Lawrence Goldie, who speciaiises in psychotherapy The third argument against truth telling is that for dying and severely ill patients, provides in this issue patients do not wish to be told the truth when they have a persuasive case for honesty with such patients. The a fatal illness and not much longer to live. It is perhaps honesty he advocates involves painstaking and sensi- worth briefly considering each of these arguments. tive commitment, not five minutes ofblunt speaking in Primum non nocere is certainly a vital principle of a busy outpatient clinic (he gives a horrifying example medical ethics but its priority or absoluteness and its ofincompetent truth telling); it is an honesty which the exact meaning may both be questioned. Clearly the patient has sought in the course of psychotherapeuti- principle can not entail that anything which causes cally orientated discussion; it is an honesty which harm to a patient must be avoided: operations for includes continuing support; and it is an honesty example cause some harm and certain life-prolonging which, believes Dr Goldie, reduces unnecessary suffer- and potentially curative cancer treatments may cause ing and helps patients to survive it when it is inevitable. severely harmful side-effects. The principle must be Such views, from a doctor who spends much of his understood to mean that the doctor should strive to ensure a professional life actually talking at length and in depth that his interventions achieve positive balancecopyright. with patients who are dying deserve very serious con- of benefit over harm. Yet even this principle cannot be sideration. Yet they probably represent a small minor- given absolute priority otherwise the doctor's safest ity ofmedical opinion on thNs issue. More commonly - course would always be to leave well alone, thereby in practice if not in print - doctors tend to deceive ensuring that he was not ever causing more harm than patients with fatal diseases (especially cancer) about good (this assertion admittedly ignores the philosophi- both diagnosis and prognosis. cal problem of whether or not one can cause things to Three arguments defending such deception are happen by inaction). If, as seems essential, primum non often heard. The first is that the doctor's primary nocere is understood in this modified way then it can http://jme.bmj.com/ moral obligation is not to harm his, or her, patient not justify deceiving patients unless (a) the failure to (primum non nocere) and that this obligation over-rides deceive would result in an overall excess of harm over the requirement not to deceive: fatally ill patients benefit and (b) the net avoidance of harm achieved by already have enough problems oftheir own without the deceit outweighed any other relevant moral principles. doctor harming them further by telling them that they It is indisputable that most people suffer anguish have cancer and will probably soon die from it. when they learn that they have a fatal disease which is The second argument against truth telling is that the likely to kill them. Far less obvious is that such infor- doctor can never be sure of the diagnosis or prognosis mation causes more harm than good, for against the on September 29, 2021 by guest. Protected and in any case patients have not been trained to under- anguish must be set such benefits as: relief of uncer- stand the truth even if they are told it: patients have tainty (many such people already suspect that some- insufficient comprehension of the intricacies of thing is seriously wrong); the possibility of informed medicine; of the enormous variety of conditions reflection and discussion about the likely course of encompassed by the word 'cancer'; of the range of events; the opportunity to take stock, mend bridges, possible outcomes; of the pros and cons of various make farewells, arrange affairs and even help family treatments, and thus, even if one wants to, it is usually and friends to come to terms with their loved one's impossible successfully to communicate the truth. An impending death; the avoidance ofthe extensive web of American physician combined these two arguments deceit in which an initially limited medical (or family) long ago when he wrote: 'it is meaningless to speak of decision to deceive often results - deceit which may telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the supplant a lifetime's mutual trust; and finally the truth to a patient. It is meaningless because it is impos- amelioration of the process ofdying which honest pre- sible . far older than the precept "the whole truth paration for death may achieve. Apart from Dr and nothing but the truth" is another that originates Goldie's own examples of the benefits of honesty in within our profession, that has always been the guide of terminal disease a vivid example is provided in a recent the best physicians and ifI may venture a prophecy will JME Case conference (2) (see also this issue's Case always remain so:"so far as possible do no har... ." (i). conference). Thus even on mere harm-benefit II6 Editorial J Med Ethics: first published as 10.1136/jme.8.3.115 on 1 September 1982. Downloaded from calculations there is good reason to doubt that deceit will hand almost go per cent of American doctors generally generally be of overall benefit to the dying patient. For withheld the truth about cancer diagnoses from their non-utilitarians such calculations are in any case not patients (8). Although these surveys are now distinctly sufficient; the maximising of overall good is only one of elderly they at least cast substantial doubt upon the claim many moral principles which may be relevant. Others that most patients do not wish to know the truth. include those various principles which may con- One possible explanation for the discrepancy be- veniently be subsumed under the concept ofrespect for tween what doctors believe about patients' wishes and the individual person. The moral principles that one what patients say they wish is the one suggested by Dr should tell the truth, honour one's promises and con- Goldie, and supported by another study (9), that doc- tracts, and keep faith with others, are all examples of tors find death, and especially the prospect oftheir own respect for persons. Another is the principle of auton- death, particularly disturbing. Certainly, talking hon- omy which recognises the individual's right to deter- estly with patients about their death is disturbing, a mine his own preferences, make his own moral profoundly moving experience, and perhaps one ofthe decisions and generally determine his own course of more difficult tasks with which a doctor may be faced. action at least in so far as it does not conflict with the Nonetheless if it was recognised more generally to be autonomy of others. Such principles might lead the an important and legitimate aspect ofhis role then ways non-utilitarian to avoid deceptions and respect a of ameliorating his disturbance, including appropriate patient's autonomy even in cases where he did foresee training, good support and a reasonable distribution of that this would result in overall harm to the patient. this type ofwork-load, could doubtless be devised with The second argument is that doctors are unable to the assistance of those experienced in such work. tell patients the truth because patients are unable to The foregoing arguments do not, it should be understand it and in any case doctors can never them- emphasised, support indiscriminate, let alone casual, selves know it to be the truth, for their diagnoses and curt or unsupporting, truth telling to all dying especially their prognoses are often wrong (most doc- patients. Rather they are arguments which reject any tors have dramatic stories to illustrate this). This blanket generalisation in this complex area. They do argument involves a fundamental confusion between however indicate that a concern for the autonomy of the moral issues of truth telling or truthfulness and the patient requires a sincere effort to be made tocopyright. deceit on the one hand and the logical, semantic and discover what his, or her, wishes really are, and then to epistemological issues besetting the concept of truth give those wishes very considerable weight. They sug- itself on the other. While these latter issues are of gest that the basic moral norms of truth telling and central importance in philosophy they have almost fidelity cannot lightly be over-ridden; and they suggest nothing to do with the question ofwhat to do with such that when assessing overall harm and benefit, more knowledge of the truth as one does have. Here the complex assessment is required than a mere considera- crucial moral issue concerns the doctor's intention; tion of the patient's.immediate distress on being told does he intend to transmit to the patient information he the truth. Finally they suggest that strategies need to http://jme.bmj.com/ has reason to believe to be true, does he intend to be developed to help medical staff deal with their own withhold it, or does he intend to lie to or otherwise distress when confronted by such problems. deceive the patient? Discussions about the concept of truth, about how we can know the truth, especially where information is probabilistic, and about different References degrees of understanding of what is known or justifi- (i) Henderson L. Physician and patient as a social system. ably believed to be true, are all but a smokescreen New Englandjournal ofmedicine 1935; 2I2: 8I9-823.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Did I Do That?
    Did I Do That? ISSUES IN COMMUNICATION, DOCUMENTATION, AND RISK IN HEALTHCARE DECISIONS. Andy McLean, MD, MPH OBJECTIVES Describe risk and protective factors in doctor-patient communication Understand the importance of appropriate health record documentation in the era of patient-centered care Articulate an awareness of how to “expand the field” when involved in difficult healthcare decisions The Art of Medicine Medical Ethics • 4 Principles: • Autonomy* • Beneficence- (Dr. should act in Pt. best interest) • Non-Maleficence- “primum non nocere” prē-mu m-̇ ˌnōn-no -̇ ˈkā-rā (first, do no harm) Justice-fairness (as in, allocation of resources) Harm combinations Resulting from the underlying Resulting from the care/services medical condition provided to the patient Inherent risk of treatment Systems failure Provider performance Canadian Medical Protective Association What happened? Duty-A physician has a duty to provide competent care to a patient Breach-Did the physician’s conduct, whether by act or omission, fall below the applicable standards of care? Causation- “But for…” Proximate cause (foreseeability) Damages Breach- Omissions of Fact and Judgment Fact- Did you review all the facts you knew or should have known… Judgment- Once reviewed, did you make a reasonable clinical decision, and document such? It is recognized that physician’s aren’t perfect and that even with reasonable care, negative outcomes occur. You are much more likely to be “forgiven” if you documented how you weighed your decision (based on the facts…) “Foreseeability”
    [Show full text]
  • Defining Remission in Rheumatoid Arthritis: What Is It? Does It Matter?
    Editorial Defining Remission in Rheumatoid Arthritis: What Is It? Does It Matter? When the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria for remission include 6 signs and symptoms: fatigue, preliminary criteria for remission1 were developed in 1981, joint pain, morning stiffness, joint tenderness, joint patients with established rheumatoid arthritis (RA) rarely swelling, and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR); phys- experienced remission, although a number of patients with ical function and structural damage to joints are ignored. recent onset of polyarthritis had periods when their RA The DAS (Disease Activity Score) index uses a mathemat- temporarily regressed or remitted and a few had prolonged ical formula to arrive at a single composite quantitative remission or even permanent recovery from the disease. score representing tender joints (Ritchie index), swollen This was more frequent in children with oligoarthritis, and joints (44-joint count), Westergren ESR and patient’s global was generally considered to be a gift from God. The guiding assessment (0–100 visual analog scale) of disease activity6. principle for treatment of RA was “primum non nocere,” It is a useful continuous quantitative summary measure of exemplified by the therapeutic pyramid. Because RA was signs and symptoms of RA inflammation, similar to the expected to persist for the lifetime of the patient, available signs and symptoms included in the dichotomous ACR drugs were used cautiously so one would not run out of ther- remission criteria, but also ignores physical function and apeutic options too rapidly. For most patients therapy had structural damage. The DAS-28 uses the abbreviated 28- little effect on continued disease progression.
    [Show full text]
  • Physician Responsibility on the Frontiers of Tort Law
    DePaul Law Review Volume 57 Issue 2 Winter 2008: Symposium - Challenges to the Attorney-Client Relationship: Threats to Article 6 Sound Advice? Dissembling and Disclosing: Physician Responsibility on the Frontiers of Tort Law Robert L. Rabin Follow this and additional works at: https://via.library.depaul.edu/law-review Recommended Citation Robert L. Rabin, Dissembling and Disclosing: Physician Responsibility on the Frontiers of Tort Law, 57 DePaul L. Rev. 281 (2008) Available at: https://via.library.depaul.edu/law-review/vol57/iss2/6 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Law at Via Sapientiae. It has been accepted for inclusion in DePaul Law Review by an authorized editor of Via Sapientiae. For more information, please contact [email protected]. DISSEMBLING AND DISCLOSING: PHYSICIAN RESPONSIBILITY ON THE FRONTIERS OF TORT LAW Robert L. Rabin* INTRODUCTION This Commentary addresses an issue that emerges as a common theme in the three papers in this Symposium Issue dealing with legal considerations in advising physicians: are there circumstances in which telling "less than the whole truth" is warranted?1 In a bygone era, physicians would have had no difficulty providing an affirmative answer to this question. Well into the twentieth century, it was com- mon practice to withhold from patients the dire news that they suf- fered from a terminal illness. In a different context, the consensus view until the latter part of the century was the so-called "physician's standard" in informed consent cases; that is, the practice of informing a patient of only those risks associated with an anticipated medical procedure that the physician deemed advisable to disclose to the pa- tient.
    [Show full text]
  • Code Gray.Pub
    Written by Christine Mitchell, RN, FAAN and Ben Achtenberg with a historical commentary by Susan Reverby, PhD and assistance from Joan Sawyer and Karen Wolf, RN, MS Contents INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... 3 Background ............................................................................................3 Synopsis of the Film ..............................................................................3 Suggested Uses .......................................................................................4 Scheduling ..............................................................................................4 FILM AS A TOOL FOR DISCUSSION .......................................................4 WHAT IS NURSING ETHICS? ...................................................................5 GLOSSARY ...................................................................................................5 SOME GENERAL DISCUSSION QUESTIONS ........................................6 CASE 1: BENEFICENCE ............................................................................7 Description of the Case .........................................................................7 The Principle: Beneficence ...................................................................7 Questions for Discussion ......................................................................8 CASE 2: AUTONOMY ................................................................................9 Description
    [Show full text]
  • First, Do No Harm”: Old and New Paradigms in Prehospital Resuscitation in the Aquatic Domain
    International Journal of Aquatic Research and Education Volume 10 Number 2 Article 5 10-16-2017 “First, Do No Harm”: Old and New Paradigms in Prehospital Resuscitation in the Aquatic Domain John H. Pearn Lady Cilento Children's Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, [email protected] Richard Charles Franklin James Cook University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.bgsu.edu/ijare Part of the Applied Ethics Commons, Bioethics and Medical Ethics Commons, Health and Physical Education Commons, Legal Theory Commons, Leisure Studies Commons, Medicine and Health Commons, Social and Philosophical Foundations of Education Commons, and the Social Control, Law, Crime, and Deviance Commons Recommended Citation Pearn, John H. and Franklin, Richard Charles (2017) "“First, Do No Harm”: Old and New Paradigms in Prehospital Resuscitation in the Aquatic Domain," International Journal of Aquatic Research and Education: Vol. 10 : No. 2 , Article 5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25035/ijare.10.02.05 Available at: https://scholarworks.bgsu.edu/ijare/vol10/iss2/5 This Education Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at ScholarWorks@BGSU. It has been accepted for inclusion in International Journal of Aquatic Research and Education by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks@BGSU. Pearn and Franklin: First, Do No Harm Abstract The balance between benefit and risk is central to the work of all those involved in aquatic services. The Hippocratic exhortation of Primum non nocere, “First, do no harm,” has a history of over 2000 years. Superficially, all would support this dictum, but harm can result from inaction.
    [Show full text]
  • The Hippocratic Oath and Principles of Medical Ethics
    MEDICINE AND PUBLIC POLICY The Hippocratic Oath and Principles of Medical Ethics Gilbert Berdine MD The Hippocratic Oath is associated with the morally right. This tradition remains in the modern practice of medicine, but over time fewer medical era. “As God is my witness I hereby pledge to …” can graduates have taken any form of the Hippocratic be found in modern rituals to stress the seriousness Oath. As of 2006, the State University of New York of purpose. Courts in the U.S. require prospective Upstate Medical School in Syracuse was the only witnesses to pledge their truthfulness: “Do you sol- U.S. medical school that administered the classic emnly swear or affirm that you will tell the truth, the version of the Hippocratic Oath to its graduates. The whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you Hippocratic Oath has been revised to make it more God?” This pledge becomes a source of contention in acceptable to modern schools, but the medical pro- a multi-cultural society as some members believe in fession no longer has a common set of promises that other deities. guide it. This article will look at the classic version of the Hippocratic Oath to see why it has been aban- Anyone who takes his or her religion seriously doned. Modern medical students wish to graduate would not pledge to a pagan god as this would be a into an ancient order of physicians, so they long for form of idolatry. This pledge is probably the main rea- a solemn ceremony, but it is difficult to craft a solemn son that the Oath has been abandoned in the modern ceremony that remains agreeable to a diverse group era, but what can take its place as a symbol of seri- of students.
    [Show full text]
  • Primum Non Nocere
    65 à la mort. Cependant, la formation en Primum Non oncologie met l’accent sur le trait- ement du cancer et fait très peu de Nocere: place à la relation d’aide en prépa- Reflections of a ration à la mort. Des médecins tels Bahá’í Oncologist que l’écrivain Atul Gawande veulent ramener le sujet de la mort dans la about Treating the conversation entre le médecin et Dying Patient le patient. De plus, bon nombre de religions, dont la foi bahá’íe, peuvent aider à examiner comment les mé- AARON ALIZADEH decins perçoivent et abordent le sujet de la mort. Dans le présent article, je Dedicated to Carley Elle Allison traite de mon expérience personnelle en tant qu’oncologue et en tant que July 18 1995 - March 31 2015 bahá’í en ce qui concerne le sujet de la mort. Abstract Medical oncology is a subspecialty of Resumen internal medicine that focuses on the Oncología médica es una subespecialidad treatment of cancer. Cancer is the sec- de la medicina interna que se encarga en el ond leading cause of mortality in the U.S. tratamiento del cáncer. El cáncer es la se- Therefore death is a frequent subject for gunda causa de mortalidad en los Estados oncologists. However, oncology train- Unidos. Por lo tanto la muerte es un tema ing emphasizes cancer therapy with little frecuente para los oncólogos. Sin embargo, guidance on counseling in preparation for la formación oncológica enfatiza el trata- death. Physicians such as the writer Atul miento del cáncer con poca orientación en Gawande are working to bring back the la preparación para la muerte.
    [Show full text]
  • Medical Ethics
    Medical Ethics Janyne Althaus, M.D., M.A. Dept. Gyn-Ob Div. Maternal-Fetal Medicine Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine Hippocratic Oath 12th-century Byzantine manuscript of the Oath Late 5th Century B.C. Basic Principles of Medical Ethics 1. Non-maleficence 2. Beneficence 3. Autonomy 4. Justice Primum non nocere Bloodletting High Oxygen for respiratory distress in premature infants Healing should be the sole purpose of medicine, and that endeavors like cosmetic surgery, contraception & euthanasia fall beyond its purview. Jehovah’s Witnesses Primary Elective Cesareans Cosmetic Gynecology Counseling parents of 24 week fetus Neonatal Intensive Care Units Transplants Forced sterilization of mentally retarded in Virginia United States of America v. Karl Brandt, et al. A sentence of death by hanging is pronounced by a US War Crimes Tribunal upon Adolf Hitler's personal physician, 43-year old Karl Brandt. Brandt was also Reich Commissar for Health and Sanitation. Of the 23 defendants, 7 were acquitted and 7 received death sentences; 9 received prison sentences ranging from 10 years to life imprisonment. Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment Peter Buxtun, PHS veneral disease investigator, the “whistleblower". •Conducted by the U.S. Public Health Service from 1932-1972 •600 Rural African-American men thought they were receiving free health care from the government. •By the end of the study in 1972, only 74 of the test subjects were alive. Of the original 399 men with syphilis, 28 had died of syphilis, 100 were dead of related complications, 40 of their wives had been infected and 19 of their children were born with congenital syphilis.
    [Show full text]
  • Daniel Patrick Moynihan and the Defense of Academic Medicine
    10 The Pharos/Spring 2017 Primum non nocere: Daniel Patrick Moynihan and the defense of academic medicine Joseph J. Fins, MD, MACP; Joan M. Leiman, PhD; and Herbert Pardes, MD Dr. Fins (AΩA, Weill Cornell Medical College, 2011, ...[M]edical education was one of the issues that Pat was Faculty) is the E. William Davis, Jr., MD, Professor of most interested in. He was deeply concerned with poverty Medical Ethics; Chief of the Division of Medical Ethics; in America & always worked on issues connected to that. Professor of Medicine; Professor of Medicine in Psychiatry; He also felt that the most important duty of a Senator was Professor of Medical Ethics in Neurology; and Professor to choose the best men/women as Federal judges. These of Health Care Policy and Research at Weill Medical were the 3 issues he cared most about…1 College of Cornell University. He is also the Director of Medical Ethics at New York-Presbyterian Weill Cornell Although Moynihan was not alone in his advocacy for Medical Center; Solomon Center Distinguished Scholar in academic medicine, it became one of his key legislative pri- Medicine, Bioethics and the Law at Yale Law School; and orities. While other leaders, like Senator Ted Kennedy (D- a member of The Pharos Editorial Board. MA) focused more on universal access to care, Moynihan’s Dr. Leiman is a Fellow at the New York-Presbyterian focus increasingly became the fate of academic medicine. Health Policy Center. Adam Clymer of The New York Times observed that Dr. Pardes (AΩA, State University of New York, Downstate Moynihan, “… carped on television about their [Clintons’] Medical Center, 1960) is Executive Vice Chairman, and health plan, quickly fixing on the role of teaching hospitals former President and CEO of New York-Presbyterian as the biggest issue in health care.” 2 Hospital.
    [Show full text]
  • The Medlaw Update and Health Care Law Committee
    The newsletter of the Medical Liability The MedLaw Update and Health Care Law Committee 10/15/2018 Volume 23 Issue 2 Feature Article Deflating Plaintiffs’ Use of the Hippocratic Oath in Medical Negligence Cases By Matthew Moriarty Lawyers representing plaintiffs in medical neg- for simple sound bites they can later display to a jury. ligence cases often ask doctors about their Conceding these points can usually be avoided, however, having taken the Hippocratic Oath. They want because the Hippocratic Oath questions are built upon a to gain a simple concession from the physician complete myth; contrary to common belief, medical oaths that they swore to uphold the principle of “pri- do not contain such a statement of primary duty. mum non nocere,” which means “first do no harm.” Here is a typical exchange: A Short History of Medical Oaths Q: As part of your job, is one of your ultimate goals when The Hippocratic Oath is the earliest known expression of you have a patient who comes into the emergency room, to medical ethics in the western world. Like many ancient keep them safe from harm? texts, its origins are unclear and its evolution extensive. It Yes. is named after Hippocrates, a Greek physician who report- Q. And you take an oath to do that, right -- do no harm? edly lived from approximately 450–370 B.C.E. But modern scholars are quite certain he did not personally write the A. That is correct. That’s the Hippocratic Oath. oath, asserting the view that it was written by a Pythago- The concept that an oath can give rise to a duty, in and rean sect after studying what is known as the Hippocratic of itself, is not the problem.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 Annual Report
    ANNUAL REPORT 2020 Thank you so much for your interest in the CAN BOARD MEETINGS AND work of the North Carolina Medical Board. HEARINGS GO DIGITAL? YES. It is tradition for the current NCMB President to orient readers of the Like most organizations and individuals, agency annual report by writing a brief letter highlighting some of the NCMB had to be both resilient and most significant events of the previous calendar year. In a way, though, creative to continue working and serving that does not seem right because the Board Member who is President the public and the profession when the when this report is released takes office in November. That means that coronavirus pandemic hit. most of the work accomplished during the calendar year 2020 happened In mid-March, NCMB closed its Raleigh offices under the watch of my predecessor, Dr. Bryant Murphy, who served as to visitors and most staff transitioned to full- Board President from Nov. 1, 2019 – Oct. 31, 2020. time work-from-home. But perhaps the biggest As you know, 2020 brought a devastating and unwelcome surprise in challenge (among all the challenges COVID-19 the form of the ongoing coronavirus pandemic. NCMB was fortunate to brought) was figuring out how to continue have Dr. Murphy’s steady hand at the helm as this agency, like so many with NCMB’s bi-monthly Board Meetings and other organizations, determined how best to continue its work and be of periodic Hearings amid tight restrictions on service amid the unprecedented challenges of the pandemic. public gatherings. Some key accomplishments related to the pandemic: In May 2020, NCMB converted to a virtual meeting format for the first time in its • Virtually all NCMB staff shifted to full time telecommuting, history.
    [Show full text]
  • Swilling Hemlock: the Legal Ethics of Defending a Client Who Wishes to Volunteer for Execution J
    Washington and Lee Law Review Volume 63 | Issue 1 Article 5 Winter 1-1-2006 Swilling Hemlock: The Legal Ethics of Defending a Client Who Wishes to Volunteer for Execution J. C. Oleson Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlulr Part of the Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility Commons Recommended Citation J. C. Oleson, Swilling Hemlock: The Legal Ethics of Defending a Client Who Wishes to Volunteer for Execution, 63 Wash. & Lee L. Rev. 147 (2006), https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlulr/ vol63/iss1/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Washington and Lee Law Review at Washington & Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington and Lee Law Review by an authorized editor of Washington & Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Swilling Hemlock: The Legal Ethics of Defending a Client Who Wishes to Volunteer for Execution J.C. Oleson* Table of Contents I. Introduction ..................................................................................148 II. Lawyers' Nightmares Do Come True: When the Client Volunteers for Execution ................................................... 150 A. Three Cornerstone Cases of American Capital Jurisprudence ......................................................................... 151 B. Death: A Growth Industry .................................................... 153 C. The Looking-Glass Ethics of the Volunteering Client ..........
    [Show full text]