Cultural assumptions and the good death: rethinking global frameworks

The concept of a 'good death' remains debated, with research largely focused on the Global North, leaving gaps in understanding its relevance to the Global South. While the concept of a good death is not a strict binary, notable differences exist. In the Global North, emphasis often lies on individual autonomy and preferences, whereas in the Global South, the focus tends to include the perspectives and needs of family and social networks. Despite differing notions of a good death between the Global North and South, Global North frameworks often set the benchmark. For example, 'The Economist's Quality of Death Index' ranks countries by their provision of a 'good death', with Western nations, particularly the UK, leading. While not explicitly endorsing a Global North model, the index promotes a narrative that implicitly positions institutionalised and professionalised palliative care as the ideal, urging lower-ranked Global South countries to adopt these standards. Using a postcolonial perspective, this paper critiques the universalisation of such models, which position Global North approaches as the gold standard. Drawing on literature and personal observations, I explore the cultural assumptions surrounding a good death and advocate for recognising diverse ways of dying. I propose that a good death consists of two components: 'value', or the judgement of what constitutes a good death, and 'logistics', or the arrangements made to achieve it. This framework underscores the importance of tailoring end-of-life care to the negotiation of value and logistics within different cultural contexts.