Editor’s note: When facing cancer, most patients and their families would choose to actively treat it at all costs, but the final result is mostly empty. It is only after the death of a loved one that many people realize that we have invested too much emotion and expectation in the treatment, but instead we did not have time to let the deceased enjoy the last affection. The United States is the country with the highest level of cancer treatment. When American doctors themselves face cancer attack and end of life, how do they choose? Many years ago, a highly respected orthopedic surgeon and my mentor, Charlie, was found to have pancreatic cancer. His primary care physician was a leader among his peers and happened to have invented a surgical procedure for this type of pancreatic cancer that could increase the patient’s survival rate by a full three times. Unfazed, Charlie was discharged home the next day, stopped his practice, and hasn’t stepped foot in a hospital since. He devoted all his time and energy to his family life and was very happy. A few months later, he died at home. The “death” of a doctor seems to be different from that of an ordinary person. Contrary to accepting as many treatments as possible, doctors hardly prefer to be treated. They fight death so often that when death is imminent, they are surprisingly calm. Because they know how their condition will evolve, what treatment options are available to them, and that they usually have the opportunity and ability to receive any treatment. But they choose – no. “No” doesn’t mean that the doctors give up on life. They want to live, but they are well aware of the limitations of medicine and understand that what people fear most is dying in pain and loneliness. They will discuss this with their families to make sure that when that day does come, they will not be resuscitated – they want life to end without CPR and the broken ribs that come with it (note: proper CPR can result in broken ribs). Almost all medical professionals have witnessed “futility treatments” in their work, that is, the use of all the most advanced techniques on a dying patient to extend his or her life. I have lost count of the number of colleagues who have said to me, “Promise me that if I ever become like this, please kill me.” Why do doctors pour so much of their hearts and souls into their patients, but are reluctant to give it to themselves? Imagine a patient who is unconscious and brought to the emergency room, where the family is usually overwhelmed by the array of choices that come to them. When the doctor asks, “Do you agree to take all possible resuscitation measures,” families often subconsciously say, “Yes. And so the nightmare begins. In fact, what the family means by “all measures” is just to take “all reasonable measures”, but then the doctors will try to do “all that they can do”, regardless of whether it “reasonable” or not. As a doctor, even if he does not want to do “ineffective treatment”, he must find a way to treat the patient and family without shame. If there are grieving families standing outside the emergency room and the doctor recommends no aggressive treatment, the families are likely to think that he is making such a recommendation to save time, money, etc. I once admitted a patient who was severely diabetic and had very poor circulation, and to make matters worse, her feet were becoming progressively more painful. As a member of the profession, I weighed the pros and cons and discouraged her as much as possible from going through with the surgery. However, she ended up going to an outside specialist I didn’t know who didn’t understand the full extent of her condition and decided to have stent surgery on her legs where the blood clots were building up. This surgery failed to restore her circulation and her wounds were unable to heal due to her diabetes. Soon, the condition of her legs began to deteriorate and they were eventually amputated. Two weeks later, she died. Doctors have seen such endings so often that they prefer to stay home and pass away quietly. Compared to overmedication, hospice care focuses more on providing patients with a sense of comfort and dignity so they can live out their final days in peace. It is worth noting that studies have found that terminal patients living in hospices live longer than patients with the same illness but actively seeking treatment. Many years ago, my cousin was diagnosed with lung cancer that had spread to his head. I took him to various specialist clinics and finally understood: in his case, if he used aggressive treatment, he would need chemotherapy 3 to 5 times a week, and that would only give him a maximum of 4 months of life. In the end, my cousin decided to give up any treatment and just take the medication to prevent brain edema and go home to recuperate. He moved into my house. We spent the next 8 months having fun together and doing many of the things we loved to do as children. We went to Disney parks, which was a first for him. We also stayed home sometimes and watched sporting events while eating meals I made. He even gained a few pounds during that time and ate whatever he wanted every day, without having to endure the terrible hospital diet at all. He did not experience severe pain and was always emotionally full. Until one day he fell into a coma, and 3 days later, he went quietly. My cousin was not a doctor, but he knew exactly what he wanted in terms of quality of life, not length of life. Isn’t that exactly what the vast majority of us think? If there is an art form for death, it should be a dignified death.