The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Legalizing Assisted Suicide — Views of Physicians in Oregon
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Since the Oregon Death with Dignity Act was passed in November 1994, physicians in Oregon have faced the prospect of legalized physician-assisted suicide. We studied the attitudes and current practices of Oregon physicians in relation to assisted suicide. METHODS: From March to June 1995, we conducted a cross-sectional mailed survey of all physicians who might be eligible to prescribe a lethal dose of medication if the Oregon law is upheld. Physicians were asked to complete and return a confidential 56-item questionnaire. RESULTS: Of the 3944 eligible physicians who received the questionnaire, 2761 (70 percent) responded. Sixty percent of the respondents thought physician-assisted suicide should be legal in some cases, and nearly half (46 percent) might be willing to prescribe a lethal dose of medication if it were legal to do so; 31 percent of the respondents would be unwilling to do so on moral grounds. Twenty-one percent of the respondents have previously received requests for assisted suicide, and 7 percent have complied. Half the respondents were not sure what to prescribe for this purpose, and 83 percent cited financial pressure as a possible reason for such requests. The respondents also expressed concern about complications of suicide attempts and doubts about their ability to predict survival at six months accurately. CONCLUSIONS: Oregon physicians have a more favorable attitude toward legalized physician-assisted suicide, are more willing to participate, and are currently participating in greater numbers than other surveyed groups of physicians in the United States. A sizable minority of physicians in Oregon objects to legalization and participation on moral grounds. Regardless of their attitudes, physicians had a number of reservations about the practical applications of the act.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
van der Maas, P. J., van der Wal, G., Haverkate, I., de Graaff, C. L. M., Kester, J. G. C., Onwuteaka-Philipsen, B. D., van der Heide, A., Bosma, J. M., & Willems, D. L. (1996) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199611283352227 · Cited by 631
Attitude and Self-reported Practice Regarding Prognostication in a National Sample of Internists
Christakis, N. A., & Iwashyna, T. J. (1998) · Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinte.158.21.2389 · Cited by 434
Euthanasia, Ethics and Public Policy: An Argument against Legalisation
Keown, J. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511495335 · Cited by 258
Religious characteristics of U.S. physicians: A national survey
Curlin, F. A., Lantos, J. D., Roach, C. J., Sellergren, S. A., & Chin, M. H. (2005) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1111/j.1525-1497.2005.0119.x · Cited by 242
Metadata
- Authors
- Lee, M. A., Nelson, H. D., Tilden, V. P., Ganzini, L., Schmidt, T. A., & Tolle, S. W.
- Venue
- New England Journal of Medicine
- Publisher
- Massachusetts Medical Society
- Published
- 1996-02
- Volume
- 334
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 310-315
- ISSN
- 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
- 1533-4406
- OpenAlex
- W1975240173
- Cited by
- 249
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 45.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Legalizing Assisted Suicide — Views of Physicians in Oregon. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejm199602013340507
- The paper
- Lee, M. A., Nelson, H. D., Tilden, V. P., Ganzini, L., Schmidt, T. A., & Tolle, S. W. (1996). Legalizing Assisted Suicide — Views of Physicians in Oregon. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm199602013340507
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.