The significance of the distinction between “having a life” vs. “being alive” in end-of-life care

1Citations
Citations of this article
6Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

In end-of-life care discussions, I contend that the distinction between “having a life” vs. “being alive” is an underutilized distinction. This distinction is significant in separating different states of existence conflated by patients, families, and clinicians. In the clinical setting, applying this distinction in end-of-life care discussions aids patients’ and family members’ decision-making by helping them understand that being alive can differ from having a life. Moreover, this distinction helps them decide which state may be the most important to them. After applying this distinction to three complex cases, I respond to the likely objection that “having a life” vs. “being alive” is less accurate and more controversial than other distinctions. I conclude by arguing that “having a life” vs. “being alive” is more accurate and less controversial than distinctions between medically indicated vs. medically inappropriate treatments, personhood, and quantity vs. quality of life.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Enck, G. G. (2022, June 1). The significance of the distinction between “having a life” vs. “being alive” in end-of-life care. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy. Springer Science and Business Media B.V. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-022-10066-3

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free