Cargando…
US medical and surgical society position statements on physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia: a review
BACKGROUND: An analysis of the position statements of secular US medical and surgical professional societies on physician-assisted suicide (PAS) and euthanasia have not been published recently. Available statements were evaluated for position, content, and sentiment. METHODS: In order to create a co...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7640655/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33143695 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-020-00556-5 |
_version_ | 1783605791840796672 |
---|---|
author | Barsness, Joseph G. Regnier, Casey R. Hook, C. Christopher Mueller, Paul S. |
author_facet | Barsness, Joseph G. Regnier, Casey R. Hook, C. Christopher Mueller, Paul S. |
author_sort | Barsness, Joseph G. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: An analysis of the position statements of secular US medical and surgical professional societies on physician-assisted suicide (PAS) and euthanasia have not been published recently. Available statements were evaluated for position, content, and sentiment. METHODS: In order to create a comprehensive list of secular medical and surgical societies, the results of a systematic search using Google were cross-referenced with a list of societies that have a seat on the American Medical Association House of Delegates. Societies with position statements were identified. These statements were divided into 5 categories: opposed to PAS and/or euthanasia, studied neutrality, supportive, acknowledgement without statement, and no statement. Linguistic analysis was performed using RapidMinder in order to determine word frequency and sentiment respective to individual statements. To ensure accuracy, only statements with word counts > 100 were analyzed. A 2-tailed independent t test was used to test for variance among sentiment scores of opposing and studied neutrality statements. RESULTS: Of 150 societies, only 12 (8%) have position statements on PAS and euthanasia: 11 for PAS (5 opposing and 4 studied neutrality) and 9 for euthanasia (6 opposing and 2 studied neutrality). Although the most popular words used in opposing and studied neutrality statements are similar, notable exceptions exist (suicide, medicine, and treatment appear frequently in opposing statements, but not in studied neutrality statements, whereas psychologists, law, and individuals appear frequently in studied neutrality statements, but not in opposing statements). Sentiment scores for opposing and studied neutrality statements do not differ (mean, 0.094 vs. 0.104; P = 0.90). CONCLUSIONS: Few US medical and surgical societies have position statements on PAS and euthanasia. Among them, opposing and studied neutrality statements share similar linguistic sentiment. Opposing and studied neutrality statements have clear differences, but share recommendations. Both opposing and studied neutrality statements cite potential risks of PAS legalization and suggest that good palliative care might diminish a patient’s desire for PAS. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7640655 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-76406552020-11-04 US medical and surgical society position statements on physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia: a review Barsness, Joseph G. Regnier, Casey R. Hook, C. Christopher Mueller, Paul S. BMC Med Ethics Research Article BACKGROUND: An analysis of the position statements of secular US medical and surgical professional societies on physician-assisted suicide (PAS) and euthanasia have not been published recently. Available statements were evaluated for position, content, and sentiment. METHODS: In order to create a comprehensive list of secular medical and surgical societies, the results of a systematic search using Google were cross-referenced with a list of societies that have a seat on the American Medical Association House of Delegates. Societies with position statements were identified. These statements were divided into 5 categories: opposed to PAS and/or euthanasia, studied neutrality, supportive, acknowledgement without statement, and no statement. Linguistic analysis was performed using RapidMinder in order to determine word frequency and sentiment respective to individual statements. To ensure accuracy, only statements with word counts > 100 were analyzed. A 2-tailed independent t test was used to test for variance among sentiment scores of opposing and studied neutrality statements. RESULTS: Of 150 societies, only 12 (8%) have position statements on PAS and euthanasia: 11 for PAS (5 opposing and 4 studied neutrality) and 9 for euthanasia (6 opposing and 2 studied neutrality). Although the most popular words used in opposing and studied neutrality statements are similar, notable exceptions exist (suicide, medicine, and treatment appear frequently in opposing statements, but not in studied neutrality statements, whereas psychologists, law, and individuals appear frequently in studied neutrality statements, but not in opposing statements). Sentiment scores for opposing and studied neutrality statements do not differ (mean, 0.094 vs. 0.104; P = 0.90). CONCLUSIONS: Few US medical and surgical societies have position statements on PAS and euthanasia. Among them, opposing and studied neutrality statements share similar linguistic sentiment. Opposing and studied neutrality statements have clear differences, but share recommendations. Both opposing and studied neutrality statements cite potential risks of PAS legalization and suggest that good palliative care might diminish a patient’s desire for PAS. BioMed Central 2020-11-03 /pmc/articles/PMC7640655/ /pubmed/33143695 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-020-00556-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Barsness, Joseph G. Regnier, Casey R. Hook, C. Christopher Mueller, Paul S. US medical and surgical society position statements on physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia: a review |
title | US medical and surgical society position statements on physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia: a review |
title_full | US medical and surgical society position statements on physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia: a review |
title_fullStr | US medical and surgical society position statements on physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia: a review |
title_full_unstemmed | US medical and surgical society position statements on physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia: a review |
title_short | US medical and surgical society position statements on physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia: a review |
title_sort | us medical and surgical society position statements on physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia: a review |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7640655/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33143695 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-020-00556-5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT barsnessjosephg usmedicalandsurgicalsocietypositionstatementsonphysicianassistedsuicideandeuthanasiaareview AT regniercaseyr usmedicalandsurgicalsocietypositionstatementsonphysicianassistedsuicideandeuthanasiaareview AT hookcchristopher usmedicalandsurgicalsocietypositionstatementsonphysicianassistedsuicideandeuthanasiaareview AT muellerpauls usmedicalandsurgicalsocietypositionstatementsonphysicianassistedsuicideandeuthanasiaareview |