Talk:Veronika Decides to Die

EURRGGHHHHHHHHHH Why did u have to give away what the doctor does, I qqqqqwertyuiowanted to read this book and you have now ruined it for me. There should at least be some sort of spoiler warning, or that part should be deleted! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.227.228.79 (talk) 14:03, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Is it ethical for a doctor to tell patients they are about to die if they aren't?

Could this have the opposite effect to a beneficial one (making them accelerate their own end by jumping from a high window, for example?)

Would a doctor really adopt this ploy?

The book seemed flawed in this respect. This part of the plot seemed both improbable and unethical.

Colin McLaughlin 12:52, 17 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Actually, I thought that was one of the most interesting things about the book. The doctor is this self-absorbed mad scientist type (I mean, come on, his name is Dr. Igor), conducting dangerous experiments on his patients without their consent or knowledge, and yet he actually manages to do something good, as if by accident.  As for whether it's believable, well, I don't think it's supposed to be.  That's part of its charm. - AdelaMa e  (talk - contribs) 04:48, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Medically accurate?
I wonder whether we should have a discussion in this article about whether the book is medically accurate? I finished the book towards the end of 2009, and while I think it is a good novel, I am sure that some people must have discussed whether the book is always medically accurate. For example, Zedka Mendel is treated with insulin therapy, and we are told that this goes back to "about 1930" - which is only half-accurate, it goes back at least as far as 1928 (Manfred Sakel was not the first person to use it). Just how The Da Vinci Code can be praised as a great novel but one which contains inaccuracies, surely we could discuss whether everything in this novel is medically accurate (for example, is it really likely that Veronika's sexual activities would be observed in a depressive?)ACEOREVIVED (talk) 22:17, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Reception
Disregard all the talk in this page about whether the book is "ethical and realistic or not" (disregarding the stance of the narrator of the story) i think we should discuss new sections. In my opinion, a reception section would be on it's place here. Does anyone know about any reviews? --188.178.215.186 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:41, 21 August 2010 (UTC).