Article Text

other Versions

PDF
Public attitudes to death and dying in the UK: a review of published literature
  1. Karen Cox1,
  2. Lydia Bird1,
  3. Anthony Arthur1,
  4. Sheila Kennedy2,
  5. Kristian Pollock1,
  6. Arun Kumar1,
  7. Wendy Stanton3 and
  8. Jane Seymour1
  1. 1School of Nursing, Midwifery and Physiotherapy, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
  2. 2School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
  3. 3Information Services, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
  1. Correspondence to Karen Cox, School of Nursing, Midwifery and Physiotherapy, University of Nottingham, Kingsmeadow Campus/Lenton La, Nottingham NG7 2NR, UK; karen.cox{at}nottingham.ac.uk

Abstract

Background Public attitudes are important in shaping public policy and the political will that determines future service provision. They also help to identify priorities for public education. This paper presents a review and synthesis of published literature on public attitudes to death and dying in the UK from 1990.

Method The approach to the review was systematic and involved searching for published research in five databases combined with reviewing references proposed by experts in the field and following up relevant citations from identified sources. The selected sources were assessed by the review team and analysed using a thematic approach.

Results The review identified 22 sources reporting 19 studies which met our criteria for inclusion in the descriptive analysis. Three descriptive themes were identified: preferences relating to death and dying, attitudes to euthanasia and attitudes to life-sustaining treatments and interventions.

Conclusion The review outcomes challenge widespread assumptions about public attitudes to death and dying and identify the need for more rigorous work to better understand public views on dying and death. Such work is needed if public health services are to meet the expectations and reflect the wishes of individuals in this area in future.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

  • Accepted 19 March 2012.
View Full Text

Footnotes

  • Competing interests None.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.