The alleviation of suffering is crucial in all of medicine, especially in the care of the dying. Suffering cannot be treated unless it is recognized and diagnosed. Suffering involves some symptom or process that threatens the patient because of fear, the meaning of the symptom, and concerns about the future. The meanings and the fear are personal and individual, so that even if two patients have the same symptoms, their suffering would be different. The complex techniques and methods that physicians usually use to make a diagnosis, however, are aimed at the body rather than the person. The diagnosis of suffering is therefore often missed, even in severe illness and even when it stares physicians in the face. A high index of suspicion must be maintained in the presence of serious disease, and patients must be directly questioned. Concerns over the discomfort of listening to patients' severe distress are usually more than offset by the gratification that follows the intervention. Often, questioning and attentive listening, which take little time, are in themselves ameliorative. The information on which the assessment of suffering is based is subjective; this may pose difficulties for physicians, who tend to value objective findings more highly and see a conflict between the two kinds of information. Recent advances in understanding how physicians increase the utility of information and make inferences allow one to reliably use the subjective information on which the diagnosis and treatment of suffering depend. Knowing patients as individual persons well enough to understand the origin of their suffering and ultimately its best treatment requires methods of empathic attentiveness and nondiscursive thinking that can be learned and taught. The relief of suffering depends on physicians acquiring these skills.

No abstract

No abstract

Medicine and ethics alike must learn properly to attend to suffering. We can never truly experience another's distress. We can, however, learn to recognize the particular purposes, values, and aesthetic responses that shape the sense of self whose integrity is threatened by pain, disease, and the mischances of life.

Palliative sedation (sedation to unconsciousness) as an option of last resort for intractable end-of-life distress has been the subject of ongoing discussion and debate as well as policy formulation. A particularly contentious issue has been whether some dying patients experience a form of intractable suffering not marked by physical symptoms that can reasonably be characterized as "existential" in nature and therefore not an acceptable indication for palliative sedation. Such is the position recently taken by the American Medical Association. In this essay we argue that such a stance reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of human suffering, particularly at the end of life, and may deprive some dying patients of an effective means of relieving their intractable terminal distress.

In sicker hospitalized patients, performance on seven Piagetian tasks of judgment was similar to that among children younger than 10 years of age. This evidence of cognitive impairment warrants further investigation.

This chapter reviews historical and modern perspectives on the positive emotion of compassion. From the time of Aristotle, compassion has been defined as an emotion experienced when individuals witness another person suffering through serious troubles, which are not self-inflicted and that we can picture ourselves experiencing. Compassion at its core is, therefore, a process of connecting by identifying with another person. The identification with others generated from compassion can then provide the motivation to do something to relieve the suffering of others. Compassion is, therefore, an emotion that is vital to the practice of medicine, psychology, and other helping professions. The chapter concludes by proposing that one future topic for the field of positive psychology will be to develop interventions and educational programs that instill compassion in helping professionals.

Like the broom in “The Sorcerer's Apprentice,” technologies take on a life of their own. To bring them under control, doctors must learn to tolerate ambiguity, resist the lure of the immediate, cease fearing uncertainty, and rechannel their response to wonder.