Recently, W;t [sic] came to the Medical College of Wisconsin (MCW) for a live performance for medical students and staff. The auditorium was full, with additional students asking if they could attend even if “they hadn’t signed up for the lunch”—an unheard of phenomenon among medical students. After the performance, the actors and selected health care professionals participated in a panel discussion, which focused on communication (or lack there of) between health professionals, between health care providers and patients, and the various roles of health professionals (the fellow, the nurse, the senior attending). It was a lively and emotional discussion with the actors seeking clarification regarding why the audience laughed when “biochemistry” was alluded to in the dialogue—a phenomenon that did not occur during the public performances and more indepth and personal issues regarding end-of-life. One of the most powerful and candid comments came from a pediatric oncologist in the audience who spoke about her ongoing struggle to balance the need to “distance” herself from her patients in order to maintain her clinical judgment and her desire to care deeply for each of her young patients. After this 3-hour session, a second-year medical student came up to me and asked, “Why don’t we have more of these kinds of activities in our medical education curriculum? This is really what medicine is about, not just biochemistry!” Indeed, health professions education must include the art as well as the science within its curriculum. How do we achieve that goal? I suggest you read Daniel Sulmasy’s article, “At Wit’s End—Forgiveness, Dignity and the Care of the Dying Patient,1 and Cindy Jones’ description below of sociodrama as an instructional strategy for end-of-life education. Then consider how you can add sociodrama to your instructional repertoire as an end-of-life educator.