“…For instance, the hegemonic discourse of a good death as defined in terms of control, autonomy, dignity, awareness, and heroism (see Chapter 1 by Van Brussel in this book) is often explicitly used as a justification for an interest in the place of death (Seale and van der Geest, 2004;Payne et al, 1996;Steinhauser et al, 2000). Emerging medical-revivalist death discourses challenging the medicalised, rationalised and institutionalised death inspire this interest, particularly in home death which is seen as more natural, enabling people to have more control over their quality of life and providing more psychological comfort (Bowling, 1983;Gallo et al, 2001;Wilson et al, 2002;Higginson et al, 1998;Brown and Colton, 2001;Yun et al, 2006). Changes over time in the place of death are also understood within the context of changing discourses around dying control and the good death (Wilson et al, 2002).…”