Responses to “Goldilocks and Mrs. Ilych: A Critical Look at the 'Philosophy of Hospice'” (CQ Vol 6 No 3) by Felicia Ackerman [Book Review]

Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 7 (2):206-207 (1998)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The critical look at hospice care by Felicia Ackerman in Vol. 6 of the CambridgeQuarterly requires a response, since the author presents her view as having major implications for health policy. As a healthcare executive with over 25 years experience, and as a spokesperson for both my own program and others in the National Hospice Work Group, twelve of the nation's largest nonprofit hospices, I submit that her analysis of hospice care is naive. Ackerman's lack of practical understanding concerning the care of the terminally ill results in a discussion that misses the key policy issues

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

A Vagueness Paradox and Its Solution.Felicia Ackerman - 1989 - Midwest Studies in Philosophy 14 (1):395-398.
The More the Merrier.Felicia Nimue Ackerman - 2006 - Dialogue 45 (3):549-558.
The concept of manipulativeness.Felicia Ackerman - 1995 - Philosophical Perspectives 9:335-340.
Roots and consequences of vagueness.Felicia Ackerman - 1994 - Philosophical Perspectives 8:129-136.
Lucinda Among the Bioethicists.Felicia Nimue Ackerman - 2007 - American Journal of Bioethics 7 (6):61-62.
Letter to the Editor.Felicia Nimue Ackerman - 2007 - Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association 80 (5):161 -.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-08-24

Downloads
71 (#226,531)

6 months
4 (#790,687)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references