Ezekiel Emanuel

Ezekiel Emanuel
Ezekiel Jonathan "Zeke" Emanuelis an American oncologist and bioethicist and fellow at the Center for American Progress. He was an associate professor at the Harvard Medical School, before joining the National Institutes of Health in 1998. He has served as the Diane and Robert Levy University Professor at the University of Pennsylvania and chair of the Department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy since September 2011 and holds a joint appointment at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine and...
NationalityAmerican
ProfessionScientist
CountryUnited States of America
Depression and psychological distress are key motivating factors, ... We need a better system of taking care of these needs, and of reducing care needs so everything doesn't fall exclusively on the patients' families.
Pending actually reading the new rules, we are generally optimistic. We think they have adopted almost everything that the Assembly of Scientists says the rules should have.
I think what this shows is that even in the midst of the debate, it is largely irrelevant, ... It's not the sum and substance of improving end-of-life care.
Everyone's got an intuition about the risk of everyday life. We thought, 'Wouldn't it be great if we could quantify it?' And once you begin to do that, you realize that everyday life is not benign.
It is terrible when an infant dies, but worse, most people think, when a three-year-old child dies, and worse still when an adolescent does.
They were very low numbers -- actually, lower than I anticipated. Considering the scope of the debate, you would think this was a major, common occurrence.
The assumption should be that we will not appear in print or the blogosphere. Having dinner should not be fodder for Facebook. And this is just as true for 'public personalities' as it is for the average person. After all, even people in the public eye have a right to a private life.
Doctors take the Hippocratic Oath too seriously, as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless of the cost or effects on others
Services provided to individuals who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens are not basic and should not be guaranteed. An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia.
By establishing a social policy that keeps physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia illegal but recognizes exceptions, we would adopt the correct moral view: the onus of proving that everything had been tried and that the motivation and rationale were convincing would rest on those who wanted to end a life.
Anyone who lives in Washington and has an official position viscerally understands the cost of a lack of privacy. Every dinner - especially ones with a journalist in attendance - is preceded by the mandatory, 'This is off the record.' But everyone also knows, nothing is really 'off the record.
Physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia have been profound ethical issues confronting doctors since the birth of Western medicine, more than 2,000 years ago.
I am not sure precisely why we need to have privacy, but everyone knows for sure that we need to relax and not have to put on our social, outwardly looking face all of the time.
Having been an oncologist and having cared for scores, if not hundreds, of dying patients, when you don't have a treatment that can shrink the tumor and the patient will die, it's a very difficult conversation. It's emotionally draining.