Acceptance of dying: A discourse analysis of palliative care literature
Abstract
The subject of death denial in the West has been examined extensively in the sociological literature. However, there has not been a similar examination of its "opposite", the acceptance of death. In this study, I use the qualitative method of discourse analysis to examine the use of the term "acceptance" of dying in the palliative care literature from 1970 to 2001. A Medline search was performed by combining the text words "accept or acceptance" with the subject headings "terminal care or palliative care or hospice care", and restricting the search to English language articles in clinical journals discussing acceptance of death in adults. The 40 articles were coded and analysed using a critical discourse analysis method. This paper focuses on the theme of acceptance as integral to palliative care, which had subthemes of acceptance as a goal of care, personal acceptance of healthcare workers, and acceptance as a facilitator of care. For patients and families, death acceptance is a goal that they can be helped to attain; for palliative care staff, acceptance of dying is a personal quality that is a precondition for effective practice. Acceptance not only facilitates the dying process for the patient and family, but also renders care easier. The analysis investigates the intertextuality of these themes with each other and with previous texts. From a Foucauldian perspective, I suggest that the discourse on acceptance of dying represents a productive power, which disciplines patients through apparent psychological and spiritual gratification, and encourages participation in a certain way to die.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
There is existing evidence that acceptance is an important element for a good death and a facilitator in the provision of end-of-life care.
“There is existing evidence that acceptance is an important element for a good death and a facilitator in the provision of end-of-life care. 78”
From Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) for people with advanced progressive illness, their caregivers and staff involved in their care: A scoping review. (2023) · cites this paper as [78]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 90 · Cited by 142
- Authors
- Zimmermann, C.
- Affiliations
- University of Toronto (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Zimmermann, Camilla
- ORCID
- Zimmermann, Camilla
- Venue
- Social Science & Medicine
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2012-07
- Volume
- 75
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 217-224
- ISSN
- 0277-9536 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2057296348
- Cited by
- 142
- References
- 90
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 5.88
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Social Science & Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Yale University
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative and Oncologic Care
- Social Sciences › Anthropology › Death, Funerary Practices, and Mourning
- Keywords
- death acceptance, palliative care, death denial, hospice care, end-of-life care, palliative care staff, Foucauldian discourse analysis, intertextuality, dying
- MeSH terms
- Adaptation, Psychological, Attitude of Health Personnel, Attitude to Death, Humans, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Palliative Care, Philosophy, Medical, Physician-Patient Relations, Terminal Care, Truth Disclosure, Hospice Care, Qualitative Research
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review