Physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia: disproportionate prevalence of women among Kevorkian's patients

End-of-life decisions are among the most difficult to make or study. When we examined these decisions made under the auspices and protection of stringent state laws, we found no gender bias among patients who chose to end their lives in the face of documented debilitating and terminal diseases. However, in the case of euthanasia as practiced by Jack Kevorkian, we found significant statistical bias against women. Moreover, other data have questioned whether all of Kevorkian's patients did, in fact, have debilitating and terminal illnesses. In this article, we explore why a gender disparity exists in end-of-life decision making. We conclude that if physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia are to be integrated into any end-of-life medical care policy, stringent legal and medical safeguards will be required. Institution of these safeguards should prevent selection bias in a vulnerable population hastening death for reasons other than medically justifiable conditions or issues of individual autonomy, and should ensure that end-of-life decisions are truly reflective of competent personal choice, free from economic considerations or societal pressure.