The New York Review of Books

‘The premier literary-intellectual magazine in the English language.’

Why should anyone—the state, the medical profession, or anyone else—presume to tell someone else how much suffering they must endure as their life is ending?

Marcia Angell, May Doctors Help You to Die?

Photo: Jacques-Louis David: The Death of Socrates, 1787 (Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York/Art Resource)

Posted at 12:34pm and tagged with: The New York Review of Books, marcia angell, physician assisted suicide, health care,.

Why should anyone—the state, the medical profession, or anyone else—presume to tell someone else how much suffering they must endure as their life is ending?

Marcia Angell, May Doctors Help You to Die?

Photo: Jacques-Louis David: The Death of Socrates, 1787 (Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York/Art Resource)

Ronald Dworkin, Why the Health Care Challenge Is Wrong

American health care is an unjust and expensive shambles; only a comprehensive national program can even begin to repair it. If the Supreme Court does declare the Affordable Care Act unconstitutional, it will have ruled that Congress lacks the power to adopt what it thought the most effective, efficient, fair, and politically viable remedy—not because that national remedy would violate anybody’s rights, or limit anyone’s liberty in ways a state government could not, or would be otherwise unfair, but for the sole reason that in the Court’s opinion the strict and arbitrary language of an antique Constitution denies our national legislature the power to enact the only politically possible national program.

Photo: Franz Jantzen

Posted at 3:42pm and tagged with: ACA, Constitution, Ronald Dworkin, Supreme Court, health care, law, politics,.

Ronald Dworkin, Why the Health Care Challenge Is Wrong

American health care is an unjust and expensive shambles; only a comprehensive national program can even begin to repair it. If the Supreme Court does declare the Affordable Care Act unconstitutional, it will have ruled that Congress lacks the power to adopt what it thought the most effective, efficient, fair, and politically viable remedy—not because that national remedy would violate anybody’s rights, or limit anyone’s liberty in ways a state government could not, or would be otherwise unfair, but for the sole reason that in the Court’s opinion the strict and arbitrary language of an antique Constitution denies our national legislature the power to enact the only politically possible national program.

Photo: Franz Jantzen
Jane Jacobs belonged to no faction or party. She was a skeptical empiricist from head to foot. She would have been disgusted by today’s right-wing Jacobinism which calls itself conservative.