IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v68y2009i3p496-503.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Community perceptions on the significant extension of life: An exploratory study among urban adults in Brisbane, Australia

Author

Listed:
  • Underwood, Mair
  • Bartlett, Helen P.
  • Partridge, Brad
  • Lucke, Jayne
  • Hall, Wayne D.

Abstract

Some researchers in the field of ageing claim that significant extension of the human lifespan will be possible in the near future. While many of these researchers have assumed that the community will welcome this technology, there has been very little research on community attitudes to life extension. This paper presents the results of an in-depth qualitative study of community attitudes to life extension across age groups and religious boundaries. There were 57 individual interviews, and 8 focus groups (totalling 72 focus group participants) conducted with community members in Brisbane, Australia. Community attitudes to life extension were more varied and complex than have been assumed by some biogerontologists and bioethicists. While some participants would welcome the opportunity to extend their lives others would not even entertain the possibility. This paper details these differences of opinion and reveals contrasting positions that reflect individualism or social concern among community members. The findings also highlight the relationship between Christianity, in particular belief in an afterlife, and attitudes to life extension technology. Overall, the study raises questions about the relationship between interest in life extension, the medicalisation of ageing and the increasing acceptability of enhancement technologies that need to be addressed in more representative samples of the community.

Suggested Citation

  • Underwood, Mair & Bartlett, Helen P. & Partridge, Brad & Lucke, Jayne & Hall, Wayne D., 2009. "Community perceptions on the significant extension of life: An exploratory study among urban adults in Brisbane, Australia," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 496-503, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:68:y:2009:i:3:p:496-503
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(08)00577-7
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:68:y:2009:i:3:p:496-503. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.