Elsevier

Social Science & Medicine

Volume 41, Issue 11, December 1995, Pages 1517-1521
Social Science & Medicine

Public opinion regarding end-of-life decisions: Influence of prognosis, practice and process

https://doi.org/10.1016/0277-9536(95)00057-EGet rights and content

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of changing key factors in survey questions on public opinion regarding end-of-life decisions. These factors were: (a) patient prognosis (likely vs unlikely to recover from the illness); (b) end-of-life practice (foregoing treatment vs assisted suicide vs euthanasia); and (c) and decision making process (competent patient vs incompetent patient based on living will vs incompetent patient based on family wishes). A representative quota sample of 2019 Canadians 18 years of age or older were surveyed using a 13-item questionnaire with 12 items eliciting attitudes towards end-of-life decisions. The questions were systematically varied according to three key factors: patient prognosis, end-of-life practice and decision making process. One item assessed whether respondents had completed a living will. In the case of a decision to forgo life-sustaining treatment in a competent patient, public approval was 85% if the person was unlikely to recover and 35% if the person was likely to recover. In the case of a competent patient unlikely to recover, public approval was 85% for forgoing life-sustaining treatment, 58% for assisted suicide, and 66% for euthanasia. In the case of forgoing life-sustaining treatment for a patient unlikely to recover, public approval was 85% for a competent patient, 88% for an incompetent patient who had expressed his/her wishes in advance through a living will, and 76% for an incompetent patient based on a family's request. The influence of these key factors was similar in other cases examined. Ten percent of Canadians said they had completed a living will. It was concluded that patient prognosis has a major effect, end-of-life practice a moderate effect, and decision making process a minor effect on public opinion regarding end-of-life decisions.

References (22)

  • Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health 110 SCt 2841,...
  • Rodriguez v. British Columbia (Attorney General) 3 S.C.R. 519,...
  • Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (US Public Law 101–508), s 4206, 4751,...
  • G.J. Annas

    Death by prescription: the Oregon initiative

    N. Engl. J. Med.

    (1994)
  • P.J. van der Mass et al.

    Euthanasia and other medical decisions concerning the end of life

    Lancet

    (1991)
  • Wilkerson Isabel

    Doctor is charged with murder in suicide by device he invented

    The New York Times

    (1990)
  • T.E. Quill

    Death and dignity

    N. Engl. J. Med.

    (1991)
  • Dutch soften laws on euthanasia

    Globe and Mail

    (1993)
  • T.E. Quill et al.

    Care of the hopelessly ill: proposed clinical criteria for physician assisted suicide

    N. Engl. J. Med.

    (1992)
  • R.J. Blendon et al.

    Should physicians aid their patients in dying?

    JAMA

    (1992)
  • S.J. Genius et al.

    Public attitudes towards the right to die

    Can. Med. Assoc. J.

    (1994)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text