Reapplying the “Argument of Preferable Alternative” within the Context of Physician-Assisted Suicide and Palliative Sedation

The practice of palliative sedation (PS) at the end of life has been examined and debated increasingly in ethical and clinical literature. The “argument of preferable alternative” (APA), first brought up by Justice O’Connor in her judgement in Washington v Glucksberg in 1997, has been examined and used by Raus et al. in the argument for the application of PS in place of physician-assisted suicide (PAS). By examining the concepts and terminology in PS from both individual and collective views within different guidelines and the assumptions of APA, we suggest that PS is too variable in practice to harness the APA.