IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/smo/raiswp/0556.html

Framing Dignity in the Debate on Requested Death

Author

Listed:
  • Deeb Paul Kitchen

    (Marian University, Indianapolis, IN, United States)

Abstract

Requested death raises ethical questions about autonomy, dignity, and protecting vulnerable populations. This paper defines 'requested death' as patient-initiated end-of-life practices, including PAS (where the physician provides but does not administer the means), euthanasia (where the provider performs the act), and death with dignity laws (which permit self-administered aid under certain conditions). This study uses Charmaz’s grounded theory and Rhoades and Rhoads’ discourse analysis to examine how both sides use narrative framing and advocacy to shape policy and public opinion. Supporters emphasize autonomy and compassion. Critics stress risks to marginalized groups and appeal to shared responsibility. The analysis uses media, legal, organizational, and personal sources to examine how the meanings of dignity are constructed and contested. The findings advocate policies that address individual and structural factors in end-of-life care.

Suggested Citation

  • Deeb Paul Kitchen, 2025. "Framing Dignity in the Debate on Requested Death," RAIS Conference Proceedings 2022-2025 0556, Research Association for Interdisciplinary Studies.
    • Handle: RePEc:smo:raiswp:0556
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://rais.education/wp-content/uploads/0556.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. McInerney, Fran, 2000. ""Requested death": a new social movement," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 137-154, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Young, Jessica E. & Jaye, Chrystal & Egan, Richard & Winters, Janine & Egan, Tony, 2021. "The discursive context of medical aid in dying: A paradox of control?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 291(C).
    2. Crossley, Nick, 2006. "The field of psychiatric contention in the UK, 1960-2000," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(3), pages 552-563, February.
    3. Karsoho, Hadi & Fishman, Jennifer R. & Wright, David Kenneth & Macdonald, Mary Ellen, 2016. "Suffering and medicalization at the end of life: The case of physician-assisted dying," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 170(C), pages 188-196.
    4. Vanderslott, Samantha, 2019. "Exploring the meaning of pro-vaccine activism across two countries," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 222(C), pages 59-66.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:smo:raiswp:0556. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Eduard David (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://rais.education/ .

    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.