Citation

Mitchell K, Glynn Owens R. Patient Educ. Couns. 2004; 54(1): 15-20.

Affiliation

Department of Psychology, University of Auckland, Tamaki Campus, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand. k.mitchell@auckland.ac.nz

Copyright

(Copyright © 2004, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

10.1016/S0738-3991(03)00167-8

PMID

15210255

Abstract

As part of a larger study, four decisions related to a vignette scenario of the elective death of a terminally ill patient suffering intractable pain are examined (doctor supplying information and drugs, assisting patient to take the drugs, or administering a lethal injection). Judgments on justifiability and legality of actions were obtained from laypersons and general practitioners (GPs) in Auckland, New Zealand. The results show that over 72% of laypersons and over 30% of GPs judged all four actions justified. Despite illegality a significant number of laypersons and some doctors were unsure of the legal status of actions. The current law in New Zealand prohibiting physician-assisted death may not reflect judgments by the majority of laypersons or 30% of general practitioners on the justifiability of elective death options for a terminally ill patient with intractable pain. Judgments on justifiability may be related to confusion over the legality of actions.

Language: en