The contribution of bioethics to clinical care at the end of life (EOL) deserves critical scrutiny. We argue that researchers have rarely questioned the normative power of autonomy-based bioethics practices. Research on the ethical dimensions of EOL decision making has focused on an idealized discourse of patient "choice" that requires patients to embrace their dying to receive excellent palliative care.

Our critique is based on a comprehensive review of empirical research exploring bioethics practices at the EOL. In addition we will provide a brief review of our own ethnographic, longitudinal study of the decision-making experience of dying patients, their families, and their health care providers.

There is little or no empirical evidence to support the autonomy paradigm of patient "choice" in EOL decision making. What we found is that (a) prognostication at the EOL is problematic and resisted; (b) shared decision making is illusory, patients often resist advance care planning and hold other values more important than autonomy, and system characteristics are more determinative of EOL care than patient preferences; and (c) the incommensurability of medical and lay knowledge and values and the multifaceted and processual nature of patient and family decision making are at odds with the current EOL approach toward advance care planning.

It is exceedingly difficult to identify, study, and critique normative assumptions without creating them, reproducing them, or obliterating them in the process. However, a fuller account of the morally significant domains of end-of-life care is needed. Researchers and policy makers should heed what we have learned from empirical research on EOL care to develop more sensitive and supportive programs for care of the dying.

Managed care may influence technology diffusion in health care. This article empirically examines the relationship between HMO market share and the diffusion of neonatal intensive care units. Higher HMO market share is associated with slower adoption of mid-level units, but not with adoption of the most advanced high-level units. Opposite the common supposition that slowing technology growth will harm patients, results suggest that health outcomes for seriously ill newborns are better in higher-level units and that reduced availability of mid-level units may increase their chance of receiving care in a high-level center, so that slower mid-level growth could have benefitted patients.

Although the fields of organization theory and social movement theory have long been viewed as belonging to different worlds, recent events have intervened, reminding us that organizations are becoming more movement-like - more volatile and politicized - while movements are more likely to borrow strategies from organizations. Organization theory and social movement theory are two of the most vibrant areas within the social sciences. This collection of original essays and studies both calls for a closer connection between these fields and demonstrates the value of this interchange. Three introductory, programmatic essays by leading scholars in the two fields are followed by eight empirical studies that directly illustrate the benefits of this type of cross-pollination. The studies variously examine the processes by which movements become organized and the role of movement processes within and among organizations. The topics covered range from globalization and transnational social movement organizations to community recycling programs.