Cited by 142Palliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesPalliative and Oncologic CareDeath, Funerary Practices, and Mourning

Acceptance of dying: A discourse analysis of palliative care literature

Zimmermann, Camilla·2012·Social Science & Medicine

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

Crossref · 10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.02.047

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

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
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