A Concise History of Euthanasia: Life, Death, God and Medicine

by Ian Dowbiggen

Historian, Ian Dowbiggin exposes the many disturbing themes that link present and past in the concept of the right to die. This provocative historical perspective will be indispensible as patients, families, governments, and the medical community debate when it is time to let go of life.

172 pages, Hardcover

First published September 25, 2005

Reviews

[Yuxi Liu · Rating 1 out of 5]

Skimming Chapter 1, I was unimpressed by the many inaccuracies. Those are not all the pedantic kind, but rather directly opposite on essential points.

For example, it claims that Confucianism bans suicide, because it deprives the ancestors of veneration. In fact, ancestral veneration is not a strong part of Confucianism, which (at least since the Han dynasty) generally avoids speaking of anything supernatural, including ancestral spirits. If we go back to the Analects, there at a few cases of suicides praised, as they were done to uphold proper conduct.
> 齊景公有馬千駟，死之日，民無德而稱焉。伯夷叔齊餓于首陽之下，民到于今稱之。其斯之謂與？
> The Duke Jing of Qi had a thousand teams, each of four horses, but on the day of his death, the people did not praise him for a single virtue. Bo Yi and Shu Qi died of hunger at the foot of the Shou Yang mountain, and the people, down to the present time, praise them. Is not that saying illustrated by this?

In general, Confucianism disapproved suicide not because it deprives ancestors of veneration, but because it is not the proper conduct -- it violates the cosmic laws of behavior. The proper conduct requires one to care for one's parents, to bring up one's offsprings, to serve the bureaucratic supervisors, etc. Suicide breaks all these obligations.

It claims that Islam considers the modern suicide bombers as martyrs, when the majority of Islam people consider them sinful and "not real Muslims".

I went through Chapter 2 quickly, and decided to stop.

Also, the author is probably against euthanasia, but he is keeping his objectivity moderately well.

[Annushka · Rating 3 out of 5]

Read this for work. It is indeed concise. Perhaps too concise?

Many interesting historical examples here, and I enjoyed the prose. The book does make some pretty sweeping claims about different societies’ views on death. Also devotes much more attention to Unitarians and Catholics compared to other religions (which would be fine if the book weren’t claiming to be a global history).

There are surprisingly few monographs on the history of assisted dying, so I’m grateful to have found this one!

[Samuel Brown · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is somewhat partisan (anti-euthanasia) but quite useful as an overview of the relevant history, and the partisanship is much milder than many of the polemics about euthanasia. I do think that both sides in the debates over assisted suicide and euthanasia would do well to contextualize their views more rigorously in terms of history, and this book offers the best effort to date from the anti-euthanasia side of the debate.

[Scooterskitten Harrison · Rating 3 out of 5]

Research for my Sociology paper. Interesting.

[Anna · Rating 4 out of 5]

Had to read it for Medical Sociology. Quotes and references are interesting and writer's point of view is presented in an unbiased way, perfect for letting the reader create his/hers own opinion.