A. Wass proteonics, and in new technologies, such as nanotechnology and regen eration technology, raise expectations for further extending human lives and unrealistic hopes for physical immortality bolstered by a flourishing anti-aging industry. Thus, criticism of death education efforts must be mpered by consideration of the larger cultural context in which these efforts are made Death education for health Professionals Pioneers in the study of dying patients and their care during the 1960s called for reform and spent their careers working toward achieving it Leading educators in the health professions have been mindful of the humanistic component in death education, attempting to balance train- ing for practical skills with attention to personal understanding and attitudes(e. g, Bertman, 1991; Papadatou, 1997; Quint Benoliel, 1967, 1982). During the early years great advances were made in the study of pain control and symptom management for the terminally ill,even- ually leading to legislation in the United States that entitles patients to compassionate pain relief" including controlled substances. One might expect that those responsible for preparing health professionals would have been eager to revise their curricula based on the data accumulating since the 1960s. However, it was primarily nursing schools that devel oped courses in death education. The most visible effect of the new teach ng was the development of hospice programs as an alternate to traditional“care” Care for the Dying in Hospice and Hospitals In professional education, the ultimate test of quality education lies in the effectiveness of care or counseling. Even though successful, hos workers have been criticized for the paucity of empirical evidence(by traditional standards of scientific inquiry) documenting efficacy. This evidence of hospice success has come largely from qualitative studies, clinical reports, and a wealth of personal narratives and testimonials by patients and their families. Despite nearly 30 years of hospice care in the United States, the mainstream medical community failed to gener- ally adopt its principles and practices for caregiving in hospital Because one of the major findings in early studies(Quint, 1967)showedproteonics, and in new technologies, such as nanotechnology and regen￾eration technology, raise expectations for further extending human lives and unrealistic hopes for physical immortality bolstered by a flourishing anti-aging industry. Thus, criticism of death education efforts must be tempered by consideration of the larger cultural context in which these efforts are made. Death Education for Health Professionals Pioneers in the study of dying patients and their care during the 1960s called for reform and spent their careers working toward achieving it. Leading educators in the health professions have been mindful of the humanistic component in death education, attempting to balance train￾ing for practical skills with attention to personal understanding and attitudes (e.g., Bertman, 1991; Papadatou, 1997; Quint Benoliel, 1967, 1982). During the early years great advances were made in the study of pain control and symptom management for the terminally ill, even￾tually leading to legislation in the United States that entitles patients to ‘‘compassionate pain relief’’ including controlled substances. One might expect that those responsible for preparing health professionals would have been eager to revise their curricula based on the data accumulating since the 1960s. However, it was primarily nursing schools that devel￾oped courses in death education.The most visible effect of the new teach￾ing was the development of hospice programs as an alternate to traditional‘‘care.’’ Care for the Dying in Hospice and Hospitals In professional education, the ultimate test of quality education lies in the effectiveness of care or counseling. Even though successful, hospice workers have been criticized for the paucity of empirical evidence (by traditional standards of scientific inquiry) documenting efficacy. This evidence of hospice success has come largely from qualitative studies, clinical reports, and a wealth of personal narratives and testimonials by patients and their families. Despite nearly 30 years of hospice care in the United States, the mainstream medical community failed to gener￾ally adopt its principles and practices for caregiving in hospitals. Because one of the major findings in early studies (Quint, 1967) showed 292 H. Wass