Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 4 · column 1 of 5 · from the scan, no model involved
In previous editorials we have endorsed the concept that, under certain conditions, extraordinary, measures being used to sustain life in a terminally ill patient be discontinued at the patient’s request. In such a case, allowing death to occur naturally can be a humanitarian act to end what otherwise would be a prolonged period of agonizing suffering in a patient for whom there is no remote possibility of recovery.
Although that is our view, we were deeply disturbed to read that an official of the federal Department of Health, Education and Welfare (HEW) had suggested the withholding of Medicare funds from state that fail to enact “living will” laws permitting people to direct that if they become terminally ill and doctors conclude that there is no possibility of recovery, lifesupport equipment should be withdrawn.
We resent the idea of government ever using federal funds as a club to force states to do what government wants done. In the matter of “living wills,” our resentment is more intense than ever before because this is the most inappropriate and unjustified proposal along this line that we have encountered.
In a memorandum to HEW Secretary Joseph A. Califano Jr. from Robert A. Derzon, administrator of
93.1%