Nearly a half of first-year students at the Faculty of Medicine (47.9%) evaluated the practice of euthanasia in negative terms, including 26.8% of the total number – definitely negatively, and 21.1% - rather negatively. An almost twice as low percentage of students evaluated this phenomenon positively (18.2%), including only 4 persons (1.4% of the total number) definitely positively. Every third respondent could not provide an unequivocal opinion (33.9%), and stated that euthanasia can be ascribed neither a positive nor negative evaluation.
------ Fig. 1 about here ------
Euthanasia is prohibited in many countries worldwide, including Poland. More than 1/4 of students (27.6%) opted for legalization of euthanasia. However, it may be presumed that the majority of them had some doubts, because they indicated the reply ‘Rather Yes’ (20.1% of the total number of respondents). In turn, 7.5% of students of medicine definitely supported the legalization of euthanasia; whereas 28.3% of the students were unable to respond to this problem.
A strong relationship was observed between general evaluation of euthanasia and the acceptance of practices in this respect (Table 2). In the group of respondents who positively evaluated euthanasia, more than 4/5 were for the acceptance of its legalization (84.0%), while only 4 students (8.0%) were against legalization.
Table 2
Acceptance of legalization of euthanasia according to the general evaluation of this phenomenon.
Acceptance of legalization of euthanasia | General evaluation of euthanasia | Total |
Positive, rather positive | Difficult to say | Negative, rather negative |
N | % | N | % | N | % | N | % |
Yes. rather Yes | 42 | 84.0 | 30 | 31.6 | 5 | 3.8 | 77 | 27.7 |
Difficult to say | 4 | 8.0 | 54 | 56.8 | 20 | 15.0 | 78 | 28.1 |
No. rather No | 4 | 8.0 | 11 | 11.6 | 108 | 81.2 | 123 | 44.2 |
Total | 50 | 100.0 | 95 | 100.0 | 133 | 100.0 | 278 | 100.0 |
Chi2 = 207.332; p < 0.001. |
Interesting declarations were observed in the group of students who were indecisive – unable to unequivocally evaluate the phenomenon of euthanasia (Table 2). Although the majority of these students had no opinion concerning legalization of euthanasia (56.8%), nearly 1/3 accepted the need for its legalization, whereas 11.6% of students were against it.
The general evaluation of euthanasia and the degree of its acceptance in the countries where it is prohibited was compiled with variables characterizing the examined students, such as: gender, age place of permanent residence, experience of living together with grandparents, size of the family of origin (number of children), and the respondents’ religious engagement.
Students from large families (3 or more children) significantly more often evaluated the phenomenon of euthanasia in negative terms, compared to those from families with one or 2 children. Negative evaluation of this phenomenon were expressed by 40.0% of students from large families and by a half lower percentage of students from small families (21.2%). Simultaneously, the respondents from small families more often evaluated euthanasia positively or rather positively, than those coming from large families (21.8% and 10.6%, respectively) (Table 3).
Different size of the family of origin of the students was also related with their acceptance of legalization of euthanasia in the countries where it is prohibited. Acceptance of such actions was significantly more frequently declared by students from small rather than large families (Table 3).
Table 3
General evaluation of euthanasia according to the number of children in the family of origin and religious engagement
| Number of children in family of origin* | Religious engagement** |
One – two | Three or more | Engaged | Not engaged |
N | N | N | % | N | % | N | % |
Definitely or rather positive | 42 | 21.8 | 9 | 10.6 | 12 | 6.4 | 39 | 43.3 |
Neither positive nor negative | 65 | 33.7 | 28 | 32.9 | 59 | 31.6 | 33 | 36.7 |
Rather negative | 45 | 23.3 | 14 | 16.5 | 48 | 25.7 | 11 | 12.2 |
Definitely negative | 41 | 21.2 | 34 | 40.0 | 68 | 36.4 | 7 | 7.8 |
Total | 193 | 100.0 | 85 | 100.0 | 187 | 100.0 | 90 | 100.0 |
*Chi2 = 13.024; p < 0.01; ** Chi2 = 68.946. p < 0.001. |
Significant differences in general evaluations and opinions concerning euthanasia were observed according to the students’ religious engagement (Table 3, 4). The majority of students who were religiously engaged (62.1%) evaluated euthanasia negatively or rather negatively (Table 3). In the group of respondents who were not religiously engaged, the percentage of students who indicated such evaluations was three times lower (20.0%). Simultaneously, in the group of students who were religiously engaged, only 6.4% evaluated euthanasia positively or rather positively, while such evaluations were expressed by 43.3% of students who were not religiously engaged (nearly 7 times higher percentage).
Table 4
Acceptance of opinions that euthanasia should be legalized, according to the number of children in the family of origin and religious engagement.
| Number of children in family of origin* | Religious engagement** |
One - two | Three or more | Engaged (a) | Not engaged |
N | N | N | % | N | % | N | % |
Definitely Yes | 17 | 8.9 | 4 | 4.7 | 1 | 0.5 | 20 | 22.5 |
Rather Yes | 46 | 24 | 9 | 10.6 | 22 | 11.8 | 33 | 37.1 |
Difficult to say | 51 | 26.6 | 27 | 31.8 | 54 | 28.9 | 23 | 25.8 |
Rather No | 33 | 17.2 | 12 | 14.1 | 39 | 20.9 | 6 | 6.7 |
Definitely No | 45 | 23.4 | 33 | 38.8 | 71 | 38.0 | 7 | 7.9 |
Total | 192 | 100.0 | 85 | 100.0 | 187 | 100.0 | 89 | 100.0 |
*Chi2 = 12.503. p < 0.05; ** Chi2 = 84.432; p < 0.001. |
A relatively low percentage of students who were religiously engaged (12.3%) accepted legalization of euthanasia in the countries where it is prohibited (Table 4), and only one person definitely supported legalization. Acceptance of such actions was declared by the majority of students who were nor religiously engaged (59.6%).
The highest percentage of respondents agreed with the opinion that euthanasia creates possibilities for abuse in the form of the deliberate, groundless disposal of persons who are inconvenient or useless. Such an attitude was shared by the majority of respondents (75.3%) and only 14.7% of students were against it (Fig. 2).
------ Fig. 2 about here ------
More than a half of respondents (56.6%) considered that each person has a right to decide about own life and its termination; thus, euthanasia is the exercising of this law. Every fifth respondent was against this opinion. Approximately a half of respondents agreed with the opinion that euthanasia is unacceptable. The remaining opinions concerning euthanasia pertain to its positive aspects and justify the possibility of its legal application. More than 2/5 of students agreed with the opinion that euthanasia is a good solution for persons who suffer greatly physically, because it shortens their suffering (42.9%). Nearly 1/4 of respondents (23.6%) considered euthanasia as a good solution for terminally ill persons, because they have an opportunity to leave this world when they are still in a relatively good condition. A relatively low percentage of students shared the opinion that euthanasia is beneficial for others, or even institutions (Fig. 3).
------ Fig. 3 about here ------
Evaluation of the degree of acceptance of individual statements concerning euthanasia was approached as an ordinal scale (Fig. 3). The statement most accepted by the respondents was that it creates the possibility for abuse by the elimination of the unwanted (M = 4.0). The least accepted was the opinion that euthanasia is a good solution for mentally ill persons because it solves their problems (M = 1.6). The order of individual statements considering the mean evaluations is consistent with that presented in Fig. 2.
The degree of acceptance of euthanasia was significantly different in the group of students coming from small and large families with respect to 6 statements (Table 5). Students from small families, to a greater degree than the remaining, shared the opinion that euthanasia is a good solution for terminally ill persons (passing away in a relatively good condition), and also to a greater degree accepted that euthanasia is a good solution for people who suffer greatly physically (shortens suffering). Students from large families, to a greater degree, accepted statements indicating the lack of acceptance of euthanasia. This concerned the statements that euthanasia violates the inalienable human right to life, and is contrary to God's law, and that it is an expression of the lack of respect for human dignity and it is inhumane.
Table 5. Mean level of acceptance of statements concerning euthanasia according to the family of origin and
religious engagement.
Opinions concerning euthanasia | Size of family | Mann-Whitney U test | Religious engagement | Mann-Whitney U test |
Small | Large | Yes | No |
Mean | Mean | U | p< | Mean | Mean | U | p< |
Right to decide about own life and its termination | 3.6 | 3.3 | 7085 | 0.054 | 3.1 | 4.3 | 4328.0 | 0.000 |
Good solution for terminally ill persons – allows passing away in good condition | 2.8 | 2.3 | 6292 | 0.001 | 2.3 | 3.4 | 4286.0 | 0.000 |
Unacceptable – violates inalienable human right to life | 3.0 | 3.5 | 6590 | 0.008 | 3.7 | 2.1 | 3337.0 | 0.000 |
Good solution for persons who physically suffer - shortens suffering | 3.2 | 2.8 | 6690 | 0.012 | 2.7 | 3.7 | 4725.5 | 0.000 |
Unacceptable - contrary to God's law | 3.1 | 3.9 | 5839 | 0.000 | 4.0 | 1.8 | 2069.5 | 0.000 |
Good solution for persons suffering mentally – solves their problems | 1.6 | 1.5 | 7604 | 0.284 | 1.4 | 1.8 | 6499.0 | 0.000 |
Inhumane | 3.0 | 3.5 | 6429 | 0.003 | 3.5 | 2.3 | 3961.0 | 0.000 |
Beneficial for families of terminally ill persons | 2.4 | 2.2 | 7394 | 0.220 | 2.2 | 2.7 | 6504.0 | 0.004 |
Lack of respect for human dignity | 2.7 | 3.3 | 6362 | 0.005 | 3.4 | 1.9 | 3479.5 | 0.000 |
Creates possibility for abuse – elimination of the unwanted | 4.0 | 4.0 | 7877 | 0.618 | 4.2 | 3.7 | 6189.0 | 0.000 |
Beneficial for society – savings in health care system pension and health benefits scheme | 2.3 | 2.2 | 7930 | 0.644 | 2.2 | 2.5 | 7341.0 | 0.072 |
Considering the acceptance of statements concerning euthanasia, even greater differences were found according to the religious engagement of students (Table 5). Statistically significant differences were noted according to almost all statements. Only in the case of one statement – euthanasia is beneficial for society – no significant difference in acceptance was observed. The respondents who were religiously engaged, to a greater degree than those not engaged, shared the view that euthanasia is an undesirable, or even unacceptable phenomenon.