American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine®

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (OnlineFirst PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
1049909107310141v1
25/2/112    most recent
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Curlin, F. A.
Right arrow Articles by Lantos, J. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Curlin, F. A.
Right arrow Articles by Lantos, J. D.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
First published on January 15, 2008, doi:10.1177/1049909107310141

American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine® 2008;25:112.

A more recent version of this article appeared on May 1, 2008

Article

To Die, to Sleep: US Physicians Religious and Other Objections to Physician-Assisted Suicide, Terminal Sedation, and Withdrawal of Life Support

Farr A. Curlin, MD*, Chinyere Nwodim, BA, Jennifer L. Vance, MA, Marshall H. Chin, MD, MPH, and John D. Lantos, MD

The University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: fcurlin{at}uchicago.edu.


  Abstract
This study analyzes data from a national survey to estimate the proportion of physicians who currently object to physician-assisted suicide (PAS), terminal sedation (TS), and withdrawal of artificial life support (WLS), and to examine associations between such objections and physician ethnicity, religious characteristics, and experience caring for dying patients. Overall, 69% of the US physicians object to PAS, 18% to TS, and 5% to WLS. Highly religious physicians are more likely than those with low religiosity to object to both PAS (84% vs 55%, P < .001) and TS (25% vs 12%, P < .001). Objection to PAS or TS is also associated with being of Asian ethnicity, of Hindu religious affiliation, and having more experience caring for dying patients. These findings suggest that, with respect to morally contested interventions at the end of life, the medical care patients receive will vary based on their physicians’ religious characteristics, ethnicity, and experience caring for dying patients.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?