Abstract

To the Editor.— The flood of opinion in the April 8 issue of JAMA 1 confirms my first impression that printing It's Over, 2 provided an important, timely platform for a colloquy on euthanasia. Lundberg 3 defends his position to publish without editorial comment with scholarship and grace. The court now supports his right to withhold the name of the author. The sad part is that he had to defend these editorial privileges at all. In a COMMENTARY 4 in this same issue, four ethicists of some repute take a position against a fundamental right when they condemnTHE JOURNALfor printing the Debbie piece. They say, What in the world is going on? And so say I. What's going on when learned men who teach what is right and just strike out at the First Amendment? And they do it ad hominem, almost in paroxysmal bursts of hysterical

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.