white logo

webmailwebmailcontactCAMSSakaiIT-Service-DeskQuick Links Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary en-espanol Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary in Chinese Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary in Korean

Racial Reconciliation Series: Beyond Colorblind

October 27, 2017
Racial Reconciliation Series: Beyond Colorblind

As part of the release of fall 2017 edition of Contact Magazine, the Office Hours Faculty Blog is proud to present a 6-week series on racial reconciliation featuring articles written by experts, scholars and ministry leaders from Gordon-Conwell. The weekly release each Friday and will include articles A Conversation with Dr. Emmett G. Price III, Beyond Colorblind, Ministering to Families in the Urban Context, How Do We Learn to Love Our Neighbor, Racial Reconciliation: My Personal Experience and Can We All Get Along.

Beyond Colorblind

Sarah Shin (MAT '17)

An adapted exerpt from the book Beyond Colorblind: Redeeming Our Ethnic Journey (IV Press, October 2017).

Our churches often avoid the topic of ethnicity and race because we don’t think it’s relevant to our faith, or we’re afraid of offending people and trying to avoid being “political.” More often than not, we don’t know how to talk about it and withdraw from conversations about race or ethnicity. We lack the skills, language and understanding to be able to share the gospel in our diverse and divided contexts.

Perhaps the reason Christians have little to say is that, for a time, we bought into the secular world’s gospel of colorblind diversity as the answer to our problems of ethnic division. Colorblindness often meant polite avoidance or silence, inside and outside the Church.

In buying into colorblindness, we lost our prophetic voice. We did not examine the Scripture’s rich depth of insight into God’s creation and intent for ethnicity, and we lacked biblical literacy on the issue, leading to lack of theological reflection, formation and repentance. Scripture formed no foundation for ourselves as ethnic beings. We either denied ethnicity as valuable or bought into the secular world’s understanding of ethnicity. This robbed us of the opportunity to hear the stories of people who are ethnically different than us.

We are shocked and unsure of how to engage when we hear of things such as a race-related incident or hate crime. Our lack of ethnic identity understanding for ourselves and those around us led to a proclamation of a gospel that is irrelevant or powerless in addressing real aches, pains and questions. Racially and culturally unaware witness and involvement in our communities caused distrust; we sometimes did more harm than good and pushed people away from us—away from opportunities to hear the gospel, and away from trusting Jesus. What resulted was and is a distant and often irrelevant, unaffected Church.

The Christian story is one that acknowledges that we are fundamentally broken. Why would the realm of ethnicity and race be exempt from the influence of sin? Colorblindness mutes Christian voice and thought from speaking into ethnic brokenness. In holding onto colorblindness as the solution, we as Christians are trying to doggy-paddle when we actually need to learn how to swim. We might sink in our attempts to stay afloat or cause others to drown as we thrash about in our good intentions.

Our world is in need of the gospel, a good news that goes beyond colorblindness, that is not afraid of addressing ethnic difference. When it comes to ethnicity, our world needs Christian voices to call for change and reform with Jesus as the transforming center of it all. How can we relevantly live out the gospel in such a hotbed of emotions, scars, division and chaos? If we avoid this topic now, we withdraw into ineffectual witness in word and deed. And we leave a broken and hurting world, friends and strangers, in chaos.

We need to recognize what we are meant to be in our ethnic stories and identities so that we can ask Jesus to restore us. It’s not just about being racially aware and sensitive so that you can be a cross-culturally savvy navigator of a multiethnic group. It’s also about Jesus redeeming and restoring our ethnic identities, which makes for a compelling narrative that causes non-Christians to ask us about our faith as they wonder, how could that kind of hope and healing be available to me?

When Jesus interacts with the Samaritan woman at the well in John 4, she responds with astonished cynicism: “You are a Jew and I am a Samaritan woman. How can you ask me for a drink?” (John 4:9).

Jesus’ attempts at conversation are parried by the woman’s multiple pointed questions about their people’s historic ethnic tensions. But by choosing to speak with her, Jesus the Messiah is embodying what Israel was meant to be: the priesthood nation and light to the Gentiles. He is redeeming what it means to be an Israelite Jew. And as the Samaritan woman experiences Jesus redeeming his people’s ethnicity, she starts to desire such living water. Jesus is transforming the disciples’ understanding of what it meant to be Jewish and the Samaritan woman’s understanding of what it meant to be Samaritan. Ethnicity no longer serves as the confines of mission. It becomes the vehicle, the sacred vessel in which God’s story comes to light.

Our ethnic stories rarely form in isolation; they often involve encounters and altercations with those around us. It’s knowing our ethnic stories and the ethnic identity narratives of those around us that help us realize the complexity of values, scars, trigger points and words to avoid. It helps us know more how to sensitively share the gospel, and boldly invite even those that were considered ethnic enemies or strangers to become believers.

Knowing and owning our ethnic narratives helps us understand the real issues of injustice, racial tension and disunity that exist in the world. Ethnicity awareness helps us ask the question of how to prophetically engage in pursuing justice, racial reconciliation and caring for the poor while we give the reason for our hope: Jesus, the great reconciler of a multiethnic people.

Sarah Shin is a resource specialist in the evangelism department of InterVarsity Christian Fellowship (IVCF). She is a speaker and trainer in ethnicity, evangelism and the arts, and she previously served IVCF as an area director in Boston and as a regional coordinator of multiethnicity. A fine artist and painter, Sarah has an M.A. in Theology degree from Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary and a Master’s in City Planning and Development from MIT. She and her husband live in Cambridge, MA


Additional Resources


Add comment


No comments yet. Be the first!

Racial Reconciliation Series: A Conversation with Dr. Emmett G. Price III

October 20, 2017
Racial Reconciliation Series: A Conversation with Dr. Emmett G. Price III

As part of the release of fall 2017 edition of Contact Magazine, the Office Hours Faculty Blog is proud to present a 6-week series on racial reconciliation featuring articles written by experts, scholars and ministry leaders from Gordon-Conwell. The inaugural article entitled A Coversation with Dr. Emmett G. Price III by Anne Doll will kick off the weekly release each Friday and will include articles Beyond Colorblind, Ministering to Families in the Urban Context, How Do We Learn to Love Our Neighbor, Racial Reconciliation: My Personal Experience and Can We All Get Along.

A Conversation with Dr. Emmett G. Price III

Anne Doll, Interim Director of Communications & Marketing


Dr. Price: “Racism has been studied by philosophers, sociologists, theologians, even musicologists. It spans the intellectual pursuit and even theology. It evolved out of the sinful nature of humanity, and the failure to see one another as the imago dei, as image bearers of God. Those who have been colonialists, those who have been imperialists, have used their authority to subjectify and objectify others into subordinate and condescending roles and functions. 

“And so across time, we find humans mistreating and abusing one another. Whether you look at the colonialization, the slave trade, the early American history of the genocide of indigenous peoples, you find the same thing over and over and over: the racialization of one another, the desire of an oppressor to ‘other-ize’ another person based on their racial identity. 

“And it’s a sinful thing. God did not create racists; God created humanity. We were dispersed across the planet into peoples and tongues, as many Bible interpretations have stated. Racism and racialization and the concept of race is a human oriented thing that is used to separate and segment us, which again is sinful because it goes against the nature of the imago dei, the ability to see each other as God’s image bearers. 


Dr. Price: “I think the indigenous have been discriminated against the most and the longest in this country. We don’t have a huge population of indigenous in the country anymore, and those remaining have been ostracized and disrespected—which is a huge atrocity. Next in terms of discrimination would be African descendants, because chronologically, the Africans were brought here as indentured servants and slaves. That legacy of servitude and subordination is horrific. The reason why the Black narrative has emerged as prominent is because discrimination of Blacks still remains. We, those of us who are here, need to tell these stories, even in the midst of it.

“As we have recently celebrated the Fourth of July, which was a declaration of independence against the British Empire that led to the emergence of this nation 241 years ago, that document was signed and celebrated even in the midst of slavery. Even in this great nation, there is a conundrum, because as much as we celebrate citizenship, freedom and liberty, not everybody is granted full citizenship, freedom and liberty. And, unfortunately, much of that is based upon race and gender. So in that Declaration of Independence, where it suggests that all men are created equal, the word ‘men’ was not a substitute for mankind or humankind. The framers meant that all white men were created equal. If you were not a white man, you did not fit the mold.”


Dr. Price: “I think it’s a progression. I don’t see it as much worse now than ever. I think the challenge is that because there have been violent atrocities against black bodies in our recent and past history, we’ve become immune to it. We have said, ‘As long as it doesn’t happen here…’ The challenge is that now it is happening here, and in a digitized era when we have video cameras in our hands at all times. These ‘live’ recordings, and the ability to replay, send and share videos make it seem as if it’s a new thing. 

“But if you go back to Emmet Till, a 14-year-old African-American boy whose brutal lynching death in Mississippi is credited with galvanizing the Civil Rights Movement, and if you go back beyond that, if you look at the maiming and torturing and murder of black bodies, both male and female, and the lynchings—back to many other horrific examples of this senselessness across the history of our country, I don’t see a new thing. I see it as a progression, although now with video proof. And the hope inherent in that for many Blacks, for people of color and also many whites, is that somebody with authority will do something about it, because there is an awakening consciousness.

“So the whole notion of ‘Black Lives Matter’ is not to suggest that black lives matter more than any other lives. But the reality is that until we all agree that black lives matter, too, or matter just as much as white lives, then we’re going to continue to have issues.” 


Dr. Price: “You cannot deal with anything if you don’t acknowledge that it exists. And factions of the Church historically have either taken a blind eye or a slighted eye to racism. I believe that until we recognize the sin of racism and the sin of not seeing one another as image bearers of God, then we’re sweeping things under the rug. The moment we acknowledge that these issues exist, then we are able to open our eyes and learn how to relate with one another, ask the questions that seem silly about one another, spend time together, fellowship and break bread with one another in our churches and be able to take leadership from clergy together. 

“What I’m looking at here is Acts 2:42-47, an example of the first Church and what those folks did. They broke bread and fellowshipped together. The churches in the New Testament wrote the very first script, and we can follow that New Testament model of what it means to spend time and learn and be with one another, to share heritages, to hear stories and share testimonies and realize that God has been working in your life just as God has been working in my life. 

“And what that does is remove the fear of the unknown. It removes the anxiety of saying something that may be presumed prejudiced or discriminatory, because nobody wants to be called a racist. And, unfortunately, many of us see life and the world in a racialized perspective until we’re called to be aware of it.” 


Dr. Price: “I do believe there is hope for those of us who follow Christ and believe that God is sovereign, that there is a time and a place we look forward to where we can eradicate this evil sin of racism, and see one another as image bearers of God—to the point of calling one another brothers and sisters in Christ.” 


Dr. Price: “There are a number of ways to do this, and many organizations are doing great work. The challenge is that certain organizations concentrate on certain people, some on intellectuals and some on youth and some on women. Some focus on churches, others, on people in the streets—those who are beyond the churches. I don’t think there is any one way to do anything. They’re all important. 

“However, the critical piece is that there have to be some people of color who are able to take a leadership role in the conversation. And the problem with many of the organizations is that they are run and led by people who are not of color. It becomes a challenge if you want to get a critical mass of people of color, because the notion is that you are still asking us to submit to the authority of a person who is not of color. There have to be a number of organizations and entities that are led by people of color.”


Dr. Price: “Many organizations nationwide are doing that. African Americans, Latinos, Asians, Indigenous—we always forget about our Asian brothers and sisters and our indigenous brothers and sisters, both of whom are making great strides. This is the space the Institute wants to sit in as well. As a leading seminary in the country and in the world, Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary has made a commitment to explore these questions, these challenges, in a way that no other seminary has endeavored to do. While many seminaries focus on Black Church Studies, we’re looking at the Black Christian Experience, which is global, which is diasporic, which is inclusive. And so in that sense, we have a broader swath and much more flexibility to be inclusive, and encompass the narratives and stories of many folks who often get ostracized and left out.”


Dr. Price: “That is a beautiful question, one that is challenging for all of us. I think the first step is to do a self-examination, and really wrestle and reflect on whether you have been part of the problem in the past. We have to change behavior in order to create a different future. A lot of people suggest that whites join black churches or make a black friend. I think those are great examples of forward progress, but those don’t do any good if you don’t reflect, to make sure you’re not part of the problem, whether implicitly or explicitly. 

“The second step is prayer. We forget that God reveals so much to us when we quiet ourselves and spend time deliberately with God. Can we enter a season of personal prayer that would allow God to illuminate and show forth various ways that may be specific to each of us, of what we can do and how to do it. I don’t believe in a one-equation-fits-all situation. 

“And the third step would be to reach out prayerfully to a person of color to initiate a safe conversation within boundaries and perimeters that is focused on race and racial relations. The reason I say ‘with boundaries and perimeters’ is that these kinds of conversations can go on for four or five hours. You may want to establish a weekly dialogue, a time where you could set aside 45 minutes or an hour and a half, so that that you can initiate a series of conversations. Keep in mind that many such conversations need time to breathe. So take a few days to think about what you heard, what you said. Then maybe start off again by debriefing your last experience. This process helps us to grow. 

“We forget that moving to a place where we eradicate racism and prejudice and discrimination means that we have to grow. We have to grow spiritually, emotionally and intellectually…and that takes time.” 

Prior to Dr. Emmett Price’s arrival to Gordon-Conwell, he served as an Associate Professor of Music at Northeastern University (Boston) for 15 years. From 2008 to 2012 he also served as chair of the Department of African American Studies. He is a former research fellow of the W.E.B. Du Bois Institute for African and African American Research at Harvard University and Northeastern University’s Center for the Study of Sport in Society, where he was lead scholar on the Rhythm & Flow Initiative. Dr. Price is also Founding Pastor of Community of Love Christian Fellowship in Allston, MA. In addition to the M.A. in Urban Ministry Leadership from Gordon-Conwell, he earned a BA from the University of California, Berkeley and both MA and Ph.D. from the University of Pittsburgh.


Additional Resources


Add comment


No comments yet. Be the first!

Drs. Hollinger and Mason testify on House Bill 119A, relative to end of life options

October 04, 2017

On Tuesday, Sept. 26, Dennis Hollinger, Ph.D. , President & Colman M. Mockler Distinguished Professor of Christian Ethics and Dr. Karen Mason, Associate Professor of Counseling and Psychology testified before the Joint Committee on Public Health at the Massachusetts Statehouse regarding Physician Assisted Suicide and House Bill 119A, An Act Relative to End of Life Options. The following are their transcribed testimonies.

Dennis Hollinger, Ph.D.,
Testimony on Physician Assisted Suicide

There have been at least three major ethical arguments given to support physician-assisted suicide.  While these arguments at first glance seem laudable, each carries with them logical and ethical flaws.



The most frequently heard appeal for medical assistance in dying is that it’s only compassionate to end the agony of a person in severe pain by taking their life.  As human beings we of course have moral obligations to show compassion to all humans, and especially those enduring extreme hardship, suffering and injustices.
But compassion is not a moral principle isolated from other principles and virtues.  In other words, compassion is not the moral trump card.  And as the late Dr. Edmund Pellegrino (Georgetown U.) once put it, “Compassion should accompany moral acts, but it does not justify them.”  
The word compassion comes from the Latin term, meaning to suffer with.  We do not suffer with a dying patient in pain by ending their life, but by providing compassionate care that aims to mitigate the pain and suffering.  Palliative care (the art of pain control), hospice care and terminal sedation (an induced continuous sleep mode) are all means of providing compassionate care at the end of life.  These are clear alternatives to assisted suicide.


A second major argument for physician-assisted suicide is that since we are autonomous beings we should have, in the face of pain and suffering, the freedom to end life as we see fit; and that entails medical assistance.  This is an old argument for euthanasia as Seneca, the Roman Stoic Philosopher once contended, “As I choose the ship in which I sail and the house in which I shall inhabit, so I will choose the death by which I will leave life.  In no matter more than in death should we act according to our desire.”
But there are fundamental flaws in this argument.  First, physician assisted suicide is never an autonomous act.  It involves doctors who must acquiesce to the request, nurses who accompany the act, families who are impacted by the act and the whole of society to which the person belongs.  An isolated autonomy denies the bonds of solidarity and community in which all humans reside and through which they find meaning, solace and identity.  Moreover, the principle of autonomy or freedom as a grounds for assisted suicide “accords rights only to those who are fully autonomous, putting the demented, the … [mentally impaired], or the permanently comatose at serious risk.”   Autonomy, applied to medically assisted dying, discriminates against suffering patients who are unable to make autonomous judgments.

Assisted Suicide is No Different than Treatment Termination

A third argument for assisted suicide is that it is no different than treatment termination, in which medical support is withdrawn and the patient dies.  Treatment termination is widely accepted and practiced everyday in hospitals around the world.  In both treatment termination and assisted suicide death is the outcome, thus goes the argument, there is no moral distinction between the two.

But there is a major flaw in this argument.  Namely, in treatment termination the disease takes the life, while in assisted suicide a human action involving death inducing drugs takes the life.  As Oxford ethicist Nigel Biggar points out, this argument for assisted suicide “suffers from a major flaw… by its implicit denial of any moral difference between involuntary homicide and murder, the outcome—death—being the same in both cases.”   In one action the intention is death.  In the other action the intention is to let nature or divine providence take its course.


Assisted suicide suffers from major flaws logically and morally.  But beyond that human life is a gift to be protected, nurtured and honored.  We do not protect, nurture and honor life when we grant a legal right to actively terminate it. 


Karen Mason, Ph.D.,
Testimony on Physician Assisted Suicide

Legalizing Aid in Dying may open the door to suicide because of the interrelationships between suicide and Aid in Dying procedurally, morally and psychologically.

1. Procedurally

Despite Section 18’s effort to distinguish Aid in Dying from assisted suicide, Aid in Dying is a type of assisted suicide in which the victim self-administers the means to death. In suicide, the victim procures the means and administers them. In Aid in Dying, the doctor prescribes the means and the victim administers them.

2. Morally

  • I came to realize this moral interrelationship while interviewing 15 Catholic, Jewish and Protestant clergy about their moral deliberations on suicide, ending futile medical treatment, Aid in Dying and euthanasia using vignettes (Mason, Kim, Martin & Gober, 2017). What struck us is that the respondents used the same moral principles to deliberate morally on vignettes depicting each of these types of death. The primary principles used were sanctity of life and the preservation of the natural course of life and others.

o  A Jewish rabbi said this about an Aid in Dying vignette: “If [a person] takes her life [through Aid in Dying] she also needs to take into account the negative impact this could have on society, on her family, on her sister. All of that does something to lessen the unshakable value of life.”

o   I work to prevent suicide and am against House Bill 1194 because I believe that a society ought to affirm the unshakable value of life.

3. Psychologically

Another interrelationship is psychological. What has struck me is the similarity of the underlying psychology in those who request Aid in Dying and those at risk of suicide.

Herbert Hendin (1997), former Medical Director for the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention and professor in the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, New York Medical College has written that seriously or terminally ill people who wish to end their lives are not significantly different from other suicidal people.


  • One psychological similarity is feeling one is a burden to others. A person who is depressed may be unable to go to work or contribute positively to the family. If this depressed person perceives him/herself to be a burden, she or he may make the mental calculation “my family would be better off without me,” “they would be better off if I were dead.” This thinking is a robust predictor of suicide risk (Chu et al., 2017; Kanzler, Bryan, McGeary, & Morrow, 2012).
  • Some who request Aid in Dying similarly dread dependence on others. Legalizing Aid in Dying will result in an erosion in the belief that people, even those who cannot contribute productively, are not burdensome because life in all its forms is valued.
  • Ganzini, Silveira, and Johnson (2002) found that patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) who were interested in assisted suicide had greater distress at being a burden than ALS patients not interested in assisted suicide.
  • Ganzini and Back (2003) found that people who requested Aid in Dying had a life-long value of control, dreaded dependence on others, were ready to die and assessed their quality of life as poor.
  • Kaplan and Schwartz (2008) conducted psychological autopsies on Kevorkian’s 93 Aid in Dying cases. More than one-third (37%) of the decedents for whom depression data was available (the first 47 cases) were described as depressed. This percentage was higher for women (40%) than for men (30%). 90% of the first 47 cases were reported as having declared that they had a high fear of dependence on others in their disabled condition.


  • Since Ganzini & Back (2003), a number of studies have found a relationship between depression and considering Aid in Dying (Marrie et al., 2017). Depression is also related to suicidal thinking (Franklin et al., 2017). Depression can distort judgment and affect the capacity to make an Aid in Dying decision (Quill, Back, & Block, 2016).
  • Hendin offers this example: “A 64-year-old woman with advanced lung cancer requested death. She was treated with a combination of analgesics (morphine and acetaminophen) on a regular basis…She was also started on antidepressants … and agreed to talk with a psychiatrist. Her mood improved rapidly, there was dramatic reduction in her pain, and she began to view her life more positively. She spoke openly about dying but wanted to be alive as long as her pain could be controlled. When asked whether the doctors should have “killed” her when she requested it, she responded with a definite no, recognizing that pain had so depressed her that she could only wish for death” (p.  211).
  • Smith et al. (2015) compared 55 Oregonians who requested Aid in Dying with 39 Oregonians with advanced disease who did not pursue Aid in Dying. The predictors of requesting Aid in Dying included: increased education, higher levels of depression, hopelessness, and higher levels of dread of dependence and lower levels of spirituality. No differences were found on pain or perceived level of social support


I am concerned that legalizing Aid in Dying may be related to an increase in suicide.

  • Jones and Paton (2015) found that in Oregon and Washington, legalizing Aid in Dying was associated with a 6.3% increase in total suicides (including assisted suicides). The increase was 14.5% in individuals over 65 years old. More research like this is needed to clarify the relationship between Aid in Dying and suicide. Some have argued that Aid in Dying prevents suicide because Aid in Dying provides people with terminal illnesses the opportunity to wait longer before death, knowing that Aid in Dying is available. This study found no evidence that Aid in Dying was associated with significant reductions in suicide for either older or younger people, and, there was NO significant decrease in suicides, even among those older than age 65.


 Additional Resources



Edmund Pellegrino, “Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide,” in John Kilner, Arlene Miller and Edmund Pellegrino eds., Dignity and Dying:  A Christian Appraisal (Grand Rapids:  Eerdmans, 1996), 110.
Seneca, Laws IX: 843.
Pellegrino, 109.
Nigel Biggar, Aiming to Kill:  the Ethics of Suicide and Euthanasia (London:  Darton, Longman and Todd, 2004), 67.

Chu, C., Walker, K.L., Stanley, I.H., Hirsch, J.K., Greenberg, J.H., Rudd, M.D., & Joiner, T.E. (2017). Perceived problem-solving deficits and suicidal ideation: evidence for the explanatory roles of thwarted belongingness and perceived burdensomeness in five samples. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
Doernberg, S.N., Peteet, J.R., & Kim, S.Y.H. (2016). Capacity evaluations of psychiatric patients requesting assisted death in the Netherlands. Psychosomatics: Journal of Consultation and Liaison Psychiatry, 57(6), 556-565.
Franklin, J. C., Ribeiro, J. D., Fox, K. R., Bentley, K. H., Kleiman, E. M., Huang, X., & ... Nock, M. K. (2017). Risk factors for suicidal thoughts and behaviors: A meta-analysis of 50 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 143(2), 187-232.
Ganzini, L., & Back, A. (2003). From the USA: Understanding requests for physician-assisted death. Palliative Medicine, 17(2), 113-114.
Ganzini, L., Goy, E.R., & Dobscha, S.K. (2008). Why Oregon patients request assisted death: family members’ views. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 23(2), 154-157.
Ganzini, L., Silveira, M. J., & Johnston, W. S. (2002). Predictors and correlates of interest in assisted suicide in the final month of life among ALS patients in Oregon and Washington. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, 24(3), 312-317.
Goy, B.R., Carlson, B., Simopoulos, N., Jackson, A., Ganzini, L. (2006). Determinants of Oregon hospice chaplains’ views on physician-assisted suicide. Journal of Palliative Care, 22(2), 83-90.
Hendin, H. (1997). Seduced by Death: Doctors, Patients, and the Dutch Cure. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Co.
Jones, D.A., & Paton, D. (2015). How does legalization of physician-assisted suicide affect rates of suicide? Southern Medical Journal, 198(10), 600-604
Kaplan, K.J., & Schwartz, M.B. (2008). A psychology of hope: A biblical response to tragedy and suicide. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.
Kanzler, K.E., Bryan, C.J., McGeary, D.D., & MOrrow, C.E. (2012). Suicidal ideation and perceived burdensomeness in patients with chronic pain. Pain Practice, 12(8), 602-609.
Marrie, R.A., Salter, A., Tyry, T., Cutter, G.R., Cofield, S., & Fox, R.J. (2017). High hypothetical interest in physician-assisted death in multiple sclerosis. Neurology, 88(16), 1528-1534.
Mason, K., Kim, E., Martin, W.B., & Gober, R.J. (2017). The moral deliberations of 15 clergy on suicide and assisted death: a qualitative study. Pastoral Psychology, 66(3), 335-351.
Pereira, J. (2011). Legalizing euthanasia or assisted suicide: the illusion of safeguards and controls. Current Oncology, 18(2), e38-e45.
Quill, T.E., Back, A.L., & Block, S.D. (2016). Responding to patients requesting physician-assisted death: physician involvement at the very end of life. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, 315(3), 245-246.
Smith, K.A., Harvath, T.A., Goy, E.R., & Ganzini, L. (2015). Predictors of pursuit of physician-assisted death. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, 49(3), 555-561.


Add comment


No comments yet. Be the first!


No comments yet. Be the first!