Your program helped me alter my position. In 1968 my father was diagnosed with a malignant tumor on the spine. A team of medical specialists advised: 1) operate for a 50-50 chance of short-term success or 2) don't operate and he would become paralyzed and die (no one could say when). The family played God and we opted for the operation (my father wanted to let it go and die). We lost: he was now a paraplegic. The doctors advised that we had made the right decision as "there was no way" that the paralysis could spread to the upper body. They were wrong. The tumor (never fully removed) had a rebirth and by 1971 he was a quadriplegic unable to move or function from the neck down. He said many times he'd like to end his life...we told him that God would decide that. In early 1975 he died of "natural" asphyxiation...in pain and panic (his mind was never affected). We had telephoned his doctor at 10:45 PM to request help. He told us to wait until morning and if there was no improvement by then he would come to the house. The doctor never had to make that visit as my father took his last gasp at 5:00 AM.
I now fully believe that his doctor knew he would not make it through the night and, at last, mercifully practiced a type of euthanasia for which I am most indebted.
Now, having just gone through five years with my mother and Alzheimer's Disease (she finally died 22 months ago) and her beseaching me to help her "end it all", I now agree, without reservation, that an adult person has the divine right to control his own destiny/fate......and with medical help, if need be. I now want that right should I end up in agony, unable to breathe, unable to move, and to have no more useful life.
Our society is kinder and more humane for animals that it is for humankind. I
thank God that Dr. Kervorkian has had the courage of his convictions and is
standing fast. I wish him well!
Dr. Kevorkian is a too far ahead of his time to be appreciated. Technology has allowed life to continue far beyond what is humane and economical. The kind of people that Dr. Kevorkian services are those who would not have survived or been banished to a colony as little as a century ago. The question is, " does the fact that a life CAN be saved mean that it SHOULD be?' Technology has exceeded humanity and is out of control. Dr Kevorkian is doing his small part to make ammends to a tehnological society out of control. Knowing that people like him exist, is a balm to sooth my mind. Leave him alone.
I believe most people fear dying in terrible pain without being able to do anything about it. I believe there should be a right to die with dignity. It is time our doctors in this country should be allowed, without fear, to respond to requests patients make of needing to be relieved of the fear of a pending painful death.
My husband and I watched the May 19th showing of "The Kevorkian Verdict". We both feel that a person should be able to choose to end his or her life because of the pain or the prospect of a prolonged deteriorating period before life painfully ends on its own. As such, a person should be allowed to approach those who have strived to offer treatment and care and say, "For my own sake and the sake of my family, I want it to end here, I no longer wish to suffer any further." At this instant, the only issue for the care giver, i.e. the doctor, should be to insure that the person is of sound mind and nothing more.
We feel that it's not up to doctors or lawyers to decide a patient's destiny. This is America, and in America, everyone has certain rights. As long as I have the rights to choose when to create life, where to live, how to raise my children, and to make decisions that will determine my place in life/society, I hope that I have the right, should I choose to do so, choose to end it.
Why is it okay for our society to use the death penalty as an excuse to eliminate criminals from our community, or for that matter, declare war on a nation which would also involve taking a life? On the other hand, why should it be illegal or frowned upon if a terminally ill person or person who is suffering from a prolonged illness asks a doctor to provide mercy? Who decides who should live and who should die? Apparently, it's okay to take a life in some instances when someone can benefit from it? But what about the person who suffers?
Itís ridiculous that Dr. Kevorkian be dragged into court every time he helps another patient. Not only is he helping the patient, he is also helping the family members of the patient who have to live with and or take care of the patient. Why not poll the American public and really see what America feels?
In my opinion, it's refreshing to see that someone who is
retired from a profession can still make an impact in
When individuals are faced with death and/or severe unending pain and suffering Doctors seam to automatically label them as depressed and unable to make rational intelligent decisions. I believe facing death clarifies ones existence like nothing else can.
We all must die. But must we die slow, lingering deaths? Getting weaker, thinner, and imprisoned in a netherworld of morphine? Some people will go that way, if they choose. I would choose differently. For, a machine forcing air into lungs. A tube in my arm nourishing my body. Pain killers lulling my conscious thought. Prisoned within my dying vessel by people around me who refuse to let me go on. Is not how I would wish to depart.
The only people who truly understand are those suffering with these illnesses. And to a lesser degree, their loved ones.
It must take a great deal of courage for Jack Kevorkian to press forward. Or perhaps it is his deep sense of compassion for humans which he derives strength to do what he feels is right against a establishment which refuses to allow death with dignity and the wishes of the dying. I hope he continues and I feel more doctors should treat the spirit and not just their patients bodies.
Paul S. Novak
I enjoyed your excellent program on the Kevorkian Verdict.I did, however, feel that FRONTLINE presented a much more postive view of Dr. Kevorkian on air than that presented by the materials in the Web Site. The Web Site material that I found most damaging to Kevorkian (e.g., his death obsession at every stage of his career, the fact that he listened to his patients when they wanted to die but ignored Mr. Gale when he pleaded to have the deadly mask removed, the fact that he has no license to practice medicine and when he did worked with dead rather than live patients) seemed curiously edited out of the program that aired. Its hard for me to believe that FRONTLINE is reluctant to take off the gloves on any topic, so why were these facts left out.
Perhaps, there was an editorial decision to remove the issue from the personality,
but I don't think that can be done, especially when the show is titled the
"KEVORKIAN VERDICT."In prescription medicide, Dr. Kevorkian says that Doctors can't
be trusted and therefore the right to kill should be restricted to "thantologists"
(death specialists) like him. I largely agree. As a nurse, the very first infant I
ever saw born was in serious trouble and the obstetrician was doing everything
possible to make it die as soon as possible. May be he knew the infnat was unlikely
to survive and belived the family would suffer less if told the baby died at birth
than that they had a dying infant who would last hours or days or maybe a week. On
the other hand, he had mad serious mistake in the delivery and was wide open to mal
practice, and settlements for severly handicapped kids who need a lifetime of care
are many times greater than those for dead babies. Knowing the man, I think it was
at least as much the former than the latter, but knowing human nature I think we
better be damn careful about giving physicians any more power to decide who lives
and who dies. Giving that power may help some people die easier, but the cost will
inevitably be paid in good lives of those who are vulnerable to bad influences.
Study after study has shown that doctors not patients are the real decision makers
regarding every aspect of medical care. There is no reason to think that this one
will be any different.
Well let me begin by saying that I have great respect for the peole who Dr. Kevorkian has helped free from lives of unconsolable pain and suffering Isn't it ironic that we are given the choice to bring another life into the world but we don't have the choice to live our own lives free of pain and suffering.
Isn't it bad enough that these people can no longer live their lives to their
potential and are getting progressivly worse without having to listen to
the courts and lawmakers whine about their puritanical points of view and morals.
These people should have the right to be free of their pain.
San Jose, CA
I found 'The Kevorkian Verdict' to be a very well-made program with a strong focus on the personal aspects of those Dr. Kevorkian is 'assisting'. While I do not agree with Dr. Kevorkian's methods, I feel it is important to understand the perspective of those who do choose his 'services'. The excellent supporting information found at your Internet Site, and the way it is presented, lends additional credibility to your program and will provide many additional hours of review and thought on this topic. I applaud you in a job well done, and look forward to many more programs and resources published on the Internet.
While I thought that the episode on the Kevorkian verdict was extremely well done, I feel that more attention should have been paid to the fact that the Dr. Kevorkian was being prosecuted for breaking laws which are unwritten and therefore do not exist. When Dr. Kevorkian brought up this fact during his trial, he was smirked at by the prosecuting attorney. This is ridiculous. Dennis McDaniel
We chose to end the pain and suffering of a member of our family. When our much beloved 17-year-old German Shepherd lost control of his bowels-- this after having lost his eyesight, hearing and nearly the use of his limbs due to arthritis-- we reluctantly had our veterinarian put him to "sleep." We believed that this was the humane thing to do. So did everone else we know. It is difficult to understand how we could begrudge a human what we would so willingly give a dog. The Lord may giveth and taketh away, as one of the physicians observed on your program about Dr. Jack Kevorkian, but physicians also give and take away. They may give you the wrong treatment and take away your health. A doctor may also provide excessive means to keep a patient alive when the patient might prefer to have the plug pulled instead. One would like to believe that physicians always have the best interests of their patients in mind. However, as the fees mount for the ever elaborate treatments used to maintain the terminally ill, one is forced to wonder where the profit motive may overrule real patient "wellbeing."
I am compelled to comment on physician-assisted suicide because I am someone who has witnessed what a horrific experience death can be. It reveals that current medical science does not provide the level of pain management that we are led to believe is possible.
While my partner, Felix Edmundo Kelley-Amerige, had the best that medical care
can provide, his last three months were a ritual of pain, humiliation, and
fear. His death was climaxed by 9 hours of traumatic pain resulting from his
body's final resistance to even very high intravenous dosing of morphine.
This kind of death has convinced me that our medical and legal systems must
accept and defend properly-safeguarded, physician-assisted suicide.
Hoping this will help,
At one time,and still in some places,some poor unfortunates are slowly tortured to death. Our modern medicine, while saving many, only enables others to prolong their deaths which is, more often than not, a slow and painful process.
It's not fair to make this comparison you say! After all, in the case of torture, the intent is bad but in the case of medicine, the intent is good. But, let me remind you, as the old cliche says, "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions."
It is certainly not appropriate to let people take their
own lives when their circumstances are not what they desire.
It is questionable that people should be allowed to take
their own lives when their health is poor and medicine can
not help them. But, when faced with the prolonged and
painful demise that is the case with terminal illness,
assisted suicide is an option that should be permitted.
Hyde Park, NY
Patients are not asking their physicians to end their life. Rather they challenge us to participate in their dying. That requires compassion, an aggressive approach to symptom management and an environment that supports the individual physically, emotionally and spiritually. When does the "right to die" become my "duty to die" because I am elderly, disabled and a costly burden to society? How we deal with death and dying in our country will determine how future generations will live!
Mark E. Thompson D.O.
Hospice Medical Director/ Hospice of Saint Joseph
Thank you for airing "The Kevorkian Verdict." Dr. Jack Kevorkian has, for many years now, been performing some of the greatest acts of mercy that the medical profession has ever seen. Although my opinion of Dr. Kevorkian's work might seem a little extreme to some, a brief look at the criteria Dr. Kevorkian uses, would certainly dispel any doubts concerning the nature of his service. If a person is clearly terminally ill, AND if the person is in extreme pain, AND if the person demonstrates over a period of time that they are committed to this decision, and that their decision has been made with understanding; then clearly assisting them to end their suffering is a great act of mercy.
If (God forbid) I should ever be so terminally ill, that there is no hope for
recovery; and if I am indeed suffering terribly, and if I should make this choice
of my own free will; I sincerely hope there would be someone caring enough and
compassionate enough to help me end the pain and suffering.
God bless Jack Kevorkian; and may his mercy be an example to us all.
My boyfriend and I really enjoy your programs. I was especially moved by your program about Dr. Jack Kevorkian that aired this week. I had been somewhat familiar with some of the specific cases that the program discussed, but getting a more in depth look at the pain these people and their families endured really had an effect on me. My own mother died of bone cancer seven years ago. And although she never indicated to me or anyone that she wanted to take her own life to end her pain, I am not really sure the extent to which she contemplated such an idea. It was difficult for my family and me to see her in such pain.
Seeing your program really made me believe that Dr. Kevorkian truly cares
about his clients and their families. He has taken, and he continues to
take such tremendous risks in helping people end their suffering. While I
understand the medical establishment's opposition to his motives and
methods, it is hard for me to understand how any reasonable person could
believe that people who endure pain everyday of their lives should continue
to suffer if they are able to make a conscious choice to go in peace.
Doctors take an oath to help people cure their illnesses, ease their pain,
and otherwise help them to live. However, our current medical system does
not have all the answers, and in many cases there is nothing they can do to
help a person who is suffering. Moreover, when they cannot find the
answers to someone's pain, they engage in traditional medical establishment
oppression of women by suggesting that a woman's pain is psychosomatic.
One of the women your program highlighted was experiencing real pain, and
yet she had doctors who tried to tell her that it was not really real.
This behavior is appalling! This is the kind of arrogance in the medical
establishment that should not be tolerated. Dr. Kevorkian's work should
receive more support than it currently gets, because he truly cares and he
truly wants to help.
Bravo for the Kevorkian report.
If anything is "wrong" about doctor-assisted suicide it lies not with Dr Kevorkian nor his patients but with societies that presume authority over personal choice. Societies and their institutions are but vehicles to support people as they follow their destinies, not--as the medical and judicial naysayers of the report contend--overseers and regulators of those destinies.
Thank you Dr Kevorkian for your devotion to your patients and for
sustaining that devotion through the self-serving short-sighted
resistance you face.
Ojo Caliente, NM
I felt troubled after seeing the episode on Kevorkian. From my experience prov iding crisis intervention for suicidal callers and from my training in social w ork and mental health, I got the impression from the show that adequate psychol ogical services may not have been provided for some or all of those whom Kevork ian has assisted. I suspect that no additional psychological treatment was pro vided during the waiting period which Kevorkian had for his clients. I believe that any waiting period should be used to provide additional psychological serv ices.
It seems pointless to me not to offer clients the opportunity to have th eir feelings heard (about which some spoke during the program) and to explore a ny existing psychological dynamics which indicate further treatment in collabor ation with one or more appropriately trained professionals. I suspect that bot h individual and couples/family counseling was warranted in many past Kevorkian cases. Also, I believe that any decision to assist a client in suicide, if eve r taken, is so significant that several appropriately trained professionals (e. g., psychologists) should review such a decision rather than any professional s uch as Kevorkian making it solely. I also had the impression that those whom K evorkian has assisted have tended to receive inadequate or improper services fr om professionals who preceded him. That this ever happens to people with such g reat needs saddens me tremendously.
One suggestion: please consider interviewing more people (such as the bioethici
st in this program) who do not have direct personal investments in any position
on a topic being presented. I noticed that those presented in this program
were generally relatives, friends, people such as Kevorkian and others who prov
ided services to those who died, and defense and prosecuting attorneys--all lik
ely to have strong personal/professional interests at stake and so less likely
be able to discuss the subject with relative objectivity. Thank you for your w
Thank you for your sensitive report on Dr. Jack Kevorkian and his crusade to legalize physician-assisted suicide. One aspect of the debate on how far physicians should be allowed to go in providing relief from suffering particularly troubles me. I listened to Sherry Miller talk about the ten surgeries her doctor performed on her and the mind-boggling array of drugs she had been given to relieve her symptoms. It does not seem to me that ten surgeries can be beneficial to anyone's health or that routinely describing powerful drugs with untold side effects can be in a patient's best interest. As someone who has suffered debilitating and permanent side effects from a course of chemotherapy, I empathize deeply with this woman and her inability to live with what I perceive to be the results of improper medical treatment. And I am angry that doctors are so willing to undertake dangerous surgeries and to administer drugs with horrific side effects but are so unwilling to allow patients the dignity to refuse further treatment and retain some control over their lives by choosing death. Are our physicians so arrogant and inhumane that they believe they have a right to inflict suffering but no obligation to help us end it?
Thanks for your excellent documentary about assisted suicide. Dr. Kavorkian may have some rough edges, but he is RIGHT. As you have clearly shown, his enemies are pompous asses who care nothing about the sufferings of others, and make a pretense of enlightenment while drowning in the effluvium of their own words. If they had better sense, they might consider asking the Dr. to help them out of their OWN misery, which may differ in character from that of Dr. Kavorkian's patients, but is surely every bit as real.
No individual or government should ever be allowed to choose for others how they should live or die as long as they bring no injury to others. Those who DO are dictators, slaveholders, and communists, and are unworthy of America.
Lets cut the confusion, support Kavorkian, and go after this medical
establishment that keeps getting fatter off the sufferings and
substance of others. Enough bullshit and hypocrisy!
I am of the opinion that the only merit in PBS is the children's educational programs and the adult "how-to" programs. Due Public Broadcasting's loathsome inability to report both sides of a story objectively.
Your story on Kevorkian was one such example. FRONTLINE spent
approximately 40-45 minutes [out of an entire hour] appealing for
viewers' pity for Dr.Kevorkian's patients suffering from terminal illness.
Because of this, it appeared that FRONTLINE was taking Kevorkian's side
thus the basis for my opinion that PBS has no objectivity.
Your piece on Jack Kevorkian has finally shown a side to Dr. Kevorkian's mission that is not shown on the evening news, and has put a face on the individuals who had chosen to end their lives because their physical health made the quality of thier lives unbearable. The decision to chose to end one's life is an extemely personal one and can only be judged on a case by case basis. This is especially true for individuals who are either terminally ill, or like Marjorie Wantz and Sherry Miller whos life was unbearable because their physical health made it impossible for them to live their lives in the manner that they choose. In our society we put so much value in human life that we sometimes forget that quality of life is an important feature of what makes life worth living.
The medical establishment has taken the view that all life is worth saving, but I doubt that anyone who is not terminally ill, or incompasitated can imagine what thier life would be like if they were in the same physical condition as Sherry Miller prior to her death.
It is interesting that when an animal is
injured so badly, to be humane we euthanaise
it rather than prolong it's suffering. This is
not to compare human life to the life of an
animal, but animal's have no choice in this
decision. We do.
What Dr. Kevorkian is doing is not new and/or unusual. What is new and unusual is that he is performing assisted suicide out in the open and light of day. This ritual goes on every day across the nation in hospitals, nursing homes and private individuals own homes. In the vernacular, the process is known as "comfort measures only". Generally, this means that a patient is connected to a continuous infusion of morphine or other powerful narcotics and allowed to die a painless death from a narcotic overdose. Often the patient consciously asks for this process and sometimes it is at the request of family members who are the legal guardians of incompetent and/or terminally unconscious patients. The overdose is titrated in such a way that the person dies within hours to a day or two, depending upon the judgement of the physician prescribing the overdose.
I believe that Dr. Kevorkian has raised the consciousness of physicians and their
patients over the past several years as the number of physicans willing to write
the order for
"comfort measures only" seems to be rising. As a registered nurse for nearly 20
years it is about time that it is recognized that all suffering cannot be relieved
by hyper-technological means and that death
can be a very desirable experience when compared to the horrific pain and suffering
that some unfortunate individuals are destined to face at often random and
unpredictable junctures of their lives.
The Universe seems to be indifferent to the suffering of human beings and it is only
the compassion and empathy of our brothers and sisters that bring meaning to our
Michael Popham, RN
Thank you for airing a controverstial subject such as this. It really touched me deeply as my Mother had died of MS several years ago...it's a horrible thing to watch a love one die, without the dignity that she had all of her life until the MS took it away from her. Mom prayed for death, and God finally answered her prayers,...Mom's suffering finally had ended. Dr. Kevorkian is a Dr. ahead of his time.
Your show on Dr. Kevorkian hit a little closer to home than I would prefer if I had the choice. I have been fighting Stage IV NH Lymphoma for three years and death has occasionally crossed my mind. I don't personally believe in giving up like that but I believe that if a terminal patient wishes to end their suffering they should be allowed to do so with the help of their doctor. I find Dr. Kevorkian, however, to be a scarry individual. He makes something that should be very private public and something that should be very rare common. He sounded uncomfortably like a Nazi doctor I saw on a film once who tried to justify the euthenasia of mentally ill patients in a prison camp during WW II. I don't want to se it come down to terminating seriously ill patients simply because they have become inconvienient.
Chester A. Harrison
Congratulations to Dr. Jack and to all Americans on the "Not Guilty" verdict. I to suffer from MS and certainly appreciate the conditions these individuals have endured. Someday I too may need his help or that of a phsician with his attitudes to end my suffering.
I feel that Mr. Kevorkian is a person that provides a need that is a part of life that no one wants to talk about. After all death is a part of life and some of us need to have the choice when to deciede when our time on this earth is not beneficially to us anymore. I hope the that all these doctors who preach about all the excellent medical care were supposed to recieve in the United States relize that not all americans have access to it. And thats not going to get easier with the way Health Insurance is going. Things need to change in the medical areana and in the way this society deals with death.
Thanks for your even-handed treatment of Dr. Kevorkian. As an MS patient, I'm fortunate to count myself among those who are able to continue living a relatively "normal" life. On the other hand, I realize that my situation may change on short notice and that I may be placed in a debilitating situation. My choice is made; should I find myself trapped within my own body, I will opt out. Call it what you will, but if my act is one of what may be perceived as one of cowardice or "the easy way out", it will be "my" choice. This is paramount.
Dr. Kevorkian is a man who stands for patients rights. The oath he took is an oath to his patients. He epitomizes the idea of a caring physician. One who cares for the entire patient, not only for a disease. Fighting a disease is not always in the best interest of a patient. Kevorkian understands the concept of an entire individual and the plight terminally ill patients endure. One can not judge these people's decisions until they have walked in their shoes. I commend Dr. Kevorkian!
I am a medical student and can only hope that I am able to care as
much as Dr. Kevorkian. He risks himself in the plight of these
people. Undoubtedly a gutsy individual.
Paul J. Padova
Dr. Kevorkian's importance is that he had the courage to bring assisted suicide into the open. In our society, the only way to put such a point of view forth is to be really in-your-face.
I suspect that there is a touch of envy in Dr. Quill. So he confessed to helping a patient die in 1991. Big deal. Dr. Kevorkian was already embarked on his mission of mercy, and Quill and the bioethicist are incidental footnotes to Kevorkian. They are sideshows who will not be remembered for anything in particular. The glory goes to the brave, not to those in safety, barking from the sidelines. Dr. Kevorkian had to endure the persecution of a mindlessly religious society -- an unending hounding by prosecutors who are primed by the religious.
Like the greats of the past, Dr. Kevorkian has had to endure torment in order to advance civilization. As for the ethicist, he would do well to become more anchored in reality. It does no good to lament the lack of adequate medical care in the United States, in spite of the usual self-serving inflated comments by the medical profession about the US having"the best health care in the world."
The ethicist has been infected with the spirit of commerce: he views life as a commodity. Every minute should be squeezed out of it, and if you don't want to then there must be something psychologically wrong with you. He is for hanging on to life like a miser hangs on to his money, to the last breath, clawing at the earth. What is wrong with a voluntary exit? It is our natural right. We surely don't need punditry in this arena as well. Everywhere there are "experts" who opine on this and that -- we can't get rid of them. The ethicist should keep his mouth shut and leave people alone to do as thry see fit with their own lives.
The argument that assisted suicide should be resisted because
certain individuals may be hastened along by their relatives
is like banning adult programming on TV because of the
assertion that some people who watch become murderers. As
always, the argument stoops to the lowest level. Because
there are some weak individuals, therefore NOBODY can do
a certain thing. This is simply not good enough. I reserve
the right to dispose of my life as I see fit, not as some
grand pooh-bah of "bioethics" (whatever that may be) thinks
is right. In some areas of life, the punditry must end.
It is not as if we can't think for ourselves without some
"expert" telling us what to think!
Harry D. Fisher
Seeing and hearing the personal testimony of those who chose suicide and of their families and friends made me so angry. Dr. Kevorkian has been in the news now for at least 5 or 6 years and yet all the public has ever seen of this public policy debate has been doctors arguing with doctors, lawyers arguing with lawyers, and lawmakers arguing with lawmakers. Have I been shielded from this direct, personal, and emotional testimony in the same hypocritical way I used to be shielded by hospital doors from exposure to death and suffering, by asylums from the pain of mental illness, and by state institutions from the embarrassment of disability? Thanks for this forum.
McIndoe Falls, VT
DR.KEVORKIAN IS DOING THE RIGHT THING FOR INDIVIDUALS IN THIS COUNTRY. AND IT IS ABOUT TIME WE PULL OUT HEADS OUT OF THE SAND AND START CHANGING LAWS IN THIS COUNTRY THAT MAKE SENSE WHEN DEALING WITH TERMINALLY ILL PEOPLE. IT IS THE INDIVIDUALS RIGHT TO CHOOSE IN THESE MATTERS NOT THE STATE,FEDERAL OR COUNTY GOVERNMENT. WAKE UP AMERICA.
I found the Kevorkian Verdict a very troubling program. It seams to me that Mr. Kevorkian enjoys his crusade a little too much. After browsing through his artworks,at your website I feel the Doctor is a very troubled man. Perhaps He should consider seeing a counseler or a psychiatrist. I think under different circumstances he might have a inclination toward murder.
Thank you for the excellent, but brief review of the Kervorkian legacy. I have been in fundamental philosophical agreement with Dr. Kervorkian, but have had mixed thoughts regarding his tactics and approach. That is, until tonight. Sometimes it is essential for a person to approach an issue the way Dr. Kervorkian has in order to get everyone's attention. In five or ten years our society will realize his legacy and will realize the debt we owe this public eccentric. I only hope he lives long enough to receive the public accolades that he deserves. I watched my younger brother suffer for five years with brain cancer. It was never his wish to die early, even though I often prayed for his death. Kervorkian was not an option for him. But thank God, there is someone like Dr. Kervorkian for those who do not have the will, the desire, or the interest to go on living in a condition that is less than what they consider minimal for continued existence. It is, after all, the decision of the person who is experiencing the malady who owns the right to decide and no one else. Thank you, PBS for airing this excellent, though abbreviated review of Dr. Kervorkian's work.
David A. Paulson