Public attitudes toward life and death

HEATED controversy surrounds the legitimacy of life-taking actions in this country, with legal abortion and capital punishment heading a growing list of issues concerning the "right " to end (or prevent) human life. While past research has focused on specific issues in the area (e.g., Gelles, et al., 1975; Kalish, et al., 1974; Ostheimer, 1980; and Tedrow and Mahoney, 1979), the conventional wisdom is that individuals form generalized beliefs about such actions and that these belief systems are responsible for their attitudes toward specific is-sues. At present, there are two basic schools of thought on the nature and manifestation of these normative beliefs. The first is a variation of the pro-life ideology sometimes attributed to anti-abortion groups (Granberg, 1978). In this view, public attitudes Abstract Opinion trends in this country indicate sharp divisions in public sentiment over a number of life-taking actions. While legal abortion and capital punishment clearly head the list, a number of other issues have gained national attention in recent years. The present paper explores the structure of belief systems giving rise to norma-tive conflicts of this kind. Of particular interest is the notion of a "pro-life " or other generic life orientation (e.g., the alleged "right-to-die " orientation of those who favor "mercy killings " in the case of terminally ill patients) as a possible explanation for public attitudes toward specific issues such as suicide and euthanasia. The present analysis assesses the empirical claims associated with such a model. The results offer qualified support for the existence of generic value orientations as revealed by public attitudes toward legal abortion, suicide, euthanasia, and capital punishment. Darwin O. Sawyer was an Assistant Professor in the Health Planning and Adminis-tration Program at Pennsylvania State University at the time of this analysis. Th