Oregon's Death With Dignity Act and End-of-Life Care Reform
This paper examines the Oregon Death With Dignity Act within the broader context of American healthcare spending, cultural attitudes toward death, and medical resource allocation. The United States spends significantly more on healthcare as a percentage of GNP than other developed nations, with a disproportionate share consumed in the final weeks and months of life. Drawing comparisons with European and Japanese cultural and medical practices, the paper argues that allowing patients to voluntarily forgo heroic end-of-life interventions could free scarce resources for preventative care, improving overall public health outcomes. Oregon's right-to-die legislation is presented as one component of a comprehensive effort to rationalize healthcare delivery and redirect spending toward higher-impact areas.
- Introduction: U.S. Healthcare Spending and End-of-Life Costs: U.S. spends disproportionately on end-of-life care
- Cultural Attitudes Toward Death and Dying: International cultural contrasts in accepting death
- Healthcare Rationing and the Case for Voluntary End-of-Life Choice: Redeploying end-of-life funds to preventive care
- Oregon's Death With Dignity Act in Context: Oregon's broader healthcare rationing framework
- Physician Incentives and the Drive Toward Intervention: Reimbursement structures driving aggressive treatment
- Conclusion: Reframing the Ethical Debate: Shifting U.S. attitudes and policy implications
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper grounds its ethical argument in concrete comparative data — U.S. versus European and Japanese healthcare spending — lending empirical weight to what might otherwise read as purely philosophical advocacy.
- It reframes the right-to-die debate as a resource-allocation question rather than a purely moral one, anticipating and pre-empting the "cost argument is unethical" objection before it is raised.
- The use of international comparisons (Netherlands, Italy, Japan, France, Germany) broadens the argument beyond domestic politics and situates Oregon's legislation within a global policy context.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper employs comparative policy analysis, juxtaposing U.S. healthcare expenditure patterns and cultural norms with those of other developed nations to argue for systemic reform. Rather than relying solely on normative ethical reasoning, it builds a pragmatic, utilitarian case that challenges the reader to weigh end-of-life heroic intervention against preventative care investments — a technique that makes the argument accessible to readers skeptical of purely philosophical frameworks.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with macroeconomic statistics on healthcare spending, then contextualizes the U.S. within international comparisons. It moves through cultural attitudes toward death, introduces the Oregon legislation, addresses physician incentive structures, and closes by reframing the ethical question around resource reallocation. This funnel structure — broad data to specific policy — is well-suited to persuasive policy writing at the undergraduate level.
Introduction: U.S. Healthcare Spending and End-of-Life Costs
America spends 50% more on healthcare as a percentage of GNP than any other country. Those countries closest to the U.S. — France and Germany — each spend approximately 10% of their GNP on healthcare (EIU, 2007). Sixty percent of an American's healthcare expenses occur in the last year of life, and forty percent of all Medicare expenses are spent on the elderly in the final month of their life (PBS, n.d.).
These figures are significantly higher than in other developed countries. Although the United States is often said to have the "best healthcare system in the world," Americans do not live longer than people in other nations. In fact, U.S. life expectancy falls below that of countries which spend considerably less on healthcare, including Japan, France, Finland, and Canada (EIU, 2007). While not all countries share the same demographic profile as the United States, one can reasonably question whether the expensive end-of-life care delivered in this country actually improves outcomes.
Part of the reason for the difference may lie in culture. The U.S. has a much higher rate of aggressive intervention in terminal cases, and rates of procedures are considerably higher in the U.S. than in other developed countries. While many Europeans and Japanese accept that a patient is dying of a fatal disease, Americans — including patients, patients' families, and healthcare providers — are far more willing to pursue dramatic treatment options, even when it is a foregone conclusion that the patient will not survive. In the absence of an express directive from the patient refusing drastic measures, the court system and the interventionist mindset of healthcare providers together create a strong impetus for aggressive treatment.
References
Crisci, M. (2001). Attitudes towards death and dying in a representative sample of the Italian population. Palliative Medicine, 372–378.
EIU. (2007). World Economic Glossary 2008. London: Economist.
Journal. (1981). Our changing attitude towards death. The Journal of Popular Culture, 741–743.
Klein, E. (2007). The health of nations: How Europe, Canada, and our own VA do health care better. The American Prospect, n.p.
NEJM Editorial. (1994). Rationing medical care — a comparative perspective. NEJM, 1089–1091.
PBS. (n.d.). How much do we spend on end-of-life care? New York, NY: PBS Channel 13.
Already a member? Log in
Unlock the rest of this paper
135,000+ research papers · AI writing tools · Plagiarism & AI detection
7-Day Pass
Does not renew
Get 7-Day PassMonthly
Renews at $12.99/month until canceled
Start MonthlyAnnual
Renews at $99/year until canceled
Start Annual- Unlimited AI writing tools
- Plagiarism and AI text detection tool
Plan details
Unlimited AI writing tools are for individual, non-automated use and are subject to our Terms of Service and abuse-prevention measures.
TextChecker scans: 3 during the 7-Day Pass, or 5 per month with Monthly and Annual.
Prices exclude applicable tax.
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.