David Kenneth Wright1, Jennifer R Fishman2, Hadi Karsoho3, Sarah Sandham4, Mary Ellen Macdonald5. 1. School of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ont. 2. Biomedical Ethics Unit, Faculty of Medicine, McGill University, Montréal, Que. 3. Department of Sociology, McGill University, Montréal, Que. 4. Faculty of Medicine, McGill University, Montréal, Que. 5. Division of Oral Health and Society, Faculty of Dentistry, McGill University, Montréal, Que.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recent events in Canada have mobilized public debate concerning the controversial issue of euthanasia. Physicians represent an essential stakeholder group with respect to the ethics and practice of euthanasia. Further, their opinions can hold sway with the public, and their public views about this issue may further reflect back upon the medical profession itself. METHODS: We conducted a discourse analysis of print media on physicians' perspectives about end-of-life care. Print media, in English and French, that appeared in Canadian newspapers from 2008 to 2012 were retrieved through a systematic database search. We analyzed the content of 285 articles either authored by a physician or directly referencing a physician's perspective. RESULTS: We identified 3 predominant discourses about physicians' public views toward euthanasia: 1) contentions about integrating euthanasia within the basic mission of medicine, 2) assertions about whether euthanasia can be distinguished from other end-of-life medical practices and 3) palliative care advocacy. INTERPRETATION: Our data showed that although some medical professional bodies appear to be supportive in the media of a movement toward the legalization of euthanasia, individual physicians are represented as mostly opposed. Professional physician organizations and the few physicians who have engaged with the media are de facto representing physicians in public contemporary debates on medical aid in dying, in general, and euthanasia, in particular. It is vital for physicians to be aware of this public debate, how they are being portrayed within it and its potential effects on impending changes to provincial and national policies.
BACKGROUND: Recent events in Canada have mobilized public debate concerning the controversial issue of euthanasia. Physicians represent an essential stakeholder group with respect to the ethics and practice of euthanasia. Further, their opinions can hold sway with the public, and their public views about this issue may further reflect back upon the medical profession itself. METHODS: We conducted a discourse analysis of print media on physicians' perspectives about end-of-life care. Print media, in English and French, that appeared in Canadian newspapers from 2008 to 2012 were retrieved through a systematic database search. We analyzed the content of 285 articles either authored by a physician or directly referencing a physician's perspective. RESULTS: We identified 3 predominant discourses about physicians' public views toward euthanasia: 1) contentions about integrating euthanasia within the basic mission of medicine, 2) assertions about whether euthanasia can be distinguished from other end-of-life medical practices and 3) palliative care advocacy. INTERPRETATION: Our data showed that although some medical professional bodies appear to be supportive in the media of a movement toward the legalization of euthanasia, individual physicians are represented as mostly opposed. Professional physician organizations and the few physicians who have engaged with the media are de facto representing physicians in public contemporary debates on medical aid in dying, in general, and euthanasia, in particular. It is vital for physicians to be aware of this public debate, how they are being portrayed within it and its potential effects on impending changes to provincial and national policies.
Authors: Judith A C Rietjens; Paul J van der Maas; Bregje D Onwuteaka-Philipsen; Johannes J M van Delden; Agnes van der Heide Journal: J Bioeth Inq Date: 2009-07-28 Impact factor: 1.352
Authors: Judith A C Rietjens; Natasja J H Raijmakers; Pauline S C Kouwenhoven; Clive Seale; Ghislaine J M W van Thiel; Margo Trappenburg; Johannes J M van Delden; Agnes van der Heide Journal: BMC Med Ethics Date: 2013-03-06 Impact factor: 2.652
Authors: Derek W Braverman; Brian S Marcus; Paul G Wakim; Mark R Mercurio; Gary S Kopf Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2017-07-15 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: Sheri Mila Gerson; Gitte H Koksvik; Naomi Richards; Lars Johan Materstvedt; David Clark Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2019-12-24 Impact factor: 3.612