Death education and attitudes toward euthanasia and terminal illness

Abstract

The attitudes of a random sample of Cleveland clergy toward the experience of terminal illness and the circumstances justifying euthanasia are presented and analyzed. The clergy response patterns revealed that, although eager to prolong life as long as possible, terminally ill patients fear a prolonged period of illness more than death itself. They also agreed that most patients favor the disclosure of terminal illness. The clergy's response to a questionnaire exhibited a definite ranking (i.e., scaling) in the order of priority of the different circumstances justifying passive euthanasia. Using training in death counseling as a control variable produced sharper division in the response categories for each statement. The controversial nature of euthanasia and the problem of ascertaining the psychological needs of the terminally ill became more apparent with the group who had more training in death counseling. Interpretations of the findings are presented, and a need for a careful reexamination of the effects of death education on attitudes toward controversial subjects in death and dying is stressed.

Factors influencing decisions to terminate life

“…This nonsignificant finding could be due to the greater degree of within-group variation than between-group variation as Nagi and Lazerine (1982) had previously found. According to the results of the present study and Nagi and Lazerine's study, dichotomization of religiosity (e.g., low vs. high) is more useful in predicting a person's decision to terminate life than religious affiliation.…”

“…In previous studies, when people were asked about their attitudes toward euthanasia, multiple aspects of the proposed euthanasia situation were combined (Jorgenson and Neubecker, 1981;Kearl and Harris, 1981;Nagi and Lazerine, 1982;Ostheimer, 1980). For example, in Kearl and Harris's study (1981), one question asked was: "When a person has a disease that cannot be cured, do you think doctors should be allowed by law to end the patient's life by some painless means if the patient and his family request it?"…”

“…A study by Nagi and Lazerine (1982) did attempt to identify specific conditions under which members of the clergy would justify passive euthanasia for the terminally ill. The purpose of Nagi and Lazerine's study was to determine whether death education and deathcounseling training affected the decision process.…”

Euthanasia and Abortion: Personality Correlates for the Decision to Terminate Life

“…Another problem that has plagued past attitudinal studies involves the combination of multiple aspects of the proposed euthanasia situation (Jorgenson & Neubecker, 1981;Kearl & Harris, 1981;Nagi & Lazerine, 1982;Ostheimer, 1980). For example, in the Kearl and Harris study, one question asked, "When a person has a disease that cannot be cured, do you think doctors should be allowed by law to end the patient's life by some painless means if the patient and his family request it?"…”

“…Similarly, Nagi and Lazerine (1982) asked members of the clergy whether they would justify passive euthanasia in the case of "intolerable pain and psychological strain." Again, different aspects of the person's situation (e.g., psychological strain and intolerable pain) were presented as if they were a single factor.…”