↓ Skip to main content

Attitudes towards legalising physician provided euthanasia in Britain: The role of religion over time

Overview of attention for article published in Social Science & Medicine, December 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
46 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
104 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Attitudes towards legalising physician provided euthanasia in Britain: The role of religion over time
Published in
Social Science & Medicine, December 2014
DOI 10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.12.030
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andriy Danyliv, Ciaran O'Neill

Abstract

Hastening the death of another whether through assisted suicide or euthanasia is the subject of intense debate in the UK and elsewhere. In this paper we use a nationally representative survey of public attitudes - the British Social Attitudes survey - to examine changes in attitudes to the legalisation of physician provided euthanasia (PPE) over almost 30 years (1983-2012) and the role of religious beliefs and religiosity in attitudes over time. Compatible questions about attitudes to euthanasia were available in the six years of 1983, 1984, 1989, 1994, 2005, and 2012. We study the trends in the support for legalisation through these time points and the relationship between attitudes, religious denomination and religiosity, controlling for a series of covariates. In total, 8099 individuals provided answers to the question about PPE in the six years of the study. The support for legalisation rose from around 76.95% in 1983 to 83.86% in 2012. This coincided with an increase in secularisation exhibited in the survey: the percentage of people with no religious affiliation increasing from 31% to 45.4% and those who do not attend a religious institution (e.g. church) increasing from 55.7% to 65.03%. The multivariate analysis demonstrates that religious affiliation and religiosity as measured by religious institution attendance frequency are the main contributors to attitudes towards euthanasia, and that the main increase in support happened among the group with least religious affiliation. Other socio-demographic characteristics do not seem to alter these attitudes systematically across the years. Our study demonstrates an increase in the support of euthanasia legalisation in Britain in the last 30 years coincided with increased secularisation. It does not follow, however, that trends in public support are immutable nor that a change in the law would improve on the current pragmatic approach toward hastening death by a physician adopted in England and Wales in terms of the balance between compassion and safeguards against abuse offered.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 104 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 102 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 20 19%
Student > Master 16 15%
Researcher 12 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 12%
Student > Postgraduate 6 6%
Other 16 15%
Unknown 22 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 20%
Social Sciences 18 17%
Psychology 12 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 9%
Arts and Humanities 8 8%
Other 12 12%
Unknown 24 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 December 2021.
All research outputs
#7,778,730
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Social Science & Medicine
#6,792
of 11,875 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#97,299
of 359,548 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Social Science & Medicine
#66
of 107 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,875 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.8. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 359,548 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 107 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.