Last year I had an article published in the Journal of Near-Death Studies that critiqued one particular NDE case-study by Dr Penny Sartori. I want to explain why I wrote the critique.
It was originally written as an essay for my PGDip in Consciousness & Transpersonal Psychology a few years ago. I had to select and critique a published journal article. I can't remember why I chose Penny's paper, I think I just happened to have read it recently and recalled that I didn't agree with all of the conclusions.
Later I decided to expand the original essay into an article for publication because it gave me the opportunity to explore alternative psychological explanations for NDEs that I had not had chance to do previously. I sometimes get asked why I am agnostic about life-after-death (and various other anomalous phenomena) when I am so interested in them. This was my opportunity to explain why. It was also a turning point for me in that my interest now lies less in the evidential value and more in the personal value of such experiences.