ABSTRACT
Legalisation of assisted suicide presents a dilemma for society. This arises because of a lack of consensus regarding the precedence to be accorded freedom of choice versus the inviolability of human life. Several factors including improvements in medical technology, population ageing and changing perceptions about quality of life serve to make a re-examination of attitudes to this issue appropriate at this time. Within this context, data from the 1983, 1984, 1989 and 1994 British Social Attitudes Surveys (BSAS) were examined. These demonstrate a slight increase in support for physician-assisted suicide (PAS) from around 75% to around 84% over the 11-year period in Britain. A much lower level of support (54%) was recorded in relation to family-assisted suicide (FAS). A logistic regression analysis of data from the 1994 survey was undertaken to establish the relationship between attitudes toward legalisation of PAS and FAS and the characteristics of the respondent. Strength of religious affiliation was found to be a significant determinant of opposition to legalisation of both. Religious denomination was found to be marginally significant in relation to PAS but not FAS. Members of the Church of England, non-Christian faiths and those of no faith were found to be marginally more likely to support legalisation of PAS, than Roman Catholics or those of other Christian faiths. Education, income, sex, marital status, long-standing illness and age were not found to be significant predictors of attitude. In relation to FAS age was also found to be significant predictor of opposition. Findings here suggest that if Britain continues to become a more secularised society, support for legalisation of PAS (and FAS) is likely to increase. As health care costs continue to grow and the ability to extend life (even where the quality of that life may be poor) increases, pressure for legalisation of PAS may increase.
Subject(s)
Attitude to Health , Public Opinion , Suicide, Assisted/psychology , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , Christianity/psychology , Family Characteristics , Forecasting , Humans , Middle Aged , Sex Factors , Socioeconomic Factors , Suicide, Assisted/legislation & jurisprudence , Suicide, Assisted/statistics & numerical data , United KingdomSubject(s)
Bioethics , Research , Ethics, Medical , Freezing , Humans , Ireland , Legislation, MedicalABSTRACT
The British Medical Association and Law Society recently produced much-needed guidance for doctors on assessment of mental capacity to consent to or refuse medical treatment. This article assesses various aspects of the guidance and examines key issues with reference to growing literature on capacity. The author recommends use of the guidance to health-care professionals generally and identifies further areas for consideration.
Subject(s)
Mental Competency/legislation & jurisprudence , Treatment Refusal/legislation & jurisprudence , Adolescent , Adult , Child , Humans , Societies, Medical , United KingdomSubject(s)
Decision Making , Euthanasia, Passive , Jurisprudence , Nutritional Support , Persistent Vegetative State , Supreme Court Decisions , Withholding Treatment , Adult , Advance Directives , Brain Diseases , Brain Injuries , Family , Guidelines as Topic , Humans , Ireland , Judicial Role , Life Support Care , Medical Futility , Mental Competency , Prognosis , Third-Party Consent , Value of LifeSubject(s)
Disclosure , Medical Records/legislation & jurisprudence , Paternalism , Patient Access to Records , Patient Advocacy/legislation & jurisprudence , Patient Rights , Risk Assessment , Attitude of Health Personnel , England , Humans , Male , Mentally Ill Persons , Middle Aged , Personal AutonomyABSTRACT
The BMA recently produced comprehensive professional guidance on advance statements and medical treatment, in the form of a Code of Practice and explanatory notes. However, some of the guidance is problematic. This article reviews various aspects of the Code and recommends its use as a set of essential explanatory notes to health-care professionals.
Subject(s)
Health Promotion , Decision Making , Health Services/legislation & jurisprudence , Health Services/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Legislation as Topic , Physician-Patient Relations , Treatment Refusal , United KingdomABSTRACT
A lawyer makes a plea for less value-laden language in genetics and explains how the use of normal and abnormal as descriptions of genes produces damaging labelling.
