Healthcare Professionals’ Perspectives on Euthanasia Legalization in Malaysia

Abstract

Euthanasia remains a contentious and emotionally charged subject, drawing considerable public debate and scrutiny in research compared to less controversial topics. Its involvement in deliberately ending human lives, albeit with compassionate intentions and the individual’s voluntary consent, has sparked widespread discussions among various stakeholders including academics, religious scholars, politicians, doctors, lawyers, and nurses. The present study seeks to investigate doctors’ and nurses’ attitudes towards euthanasia and its potential legalization in Malaysia. Employing a survey methodology adhering to established quantitative research protocols, participants were administered questionnaires to gather their viewpoints on euthanasia. The research enlisted 481 respondents who completed the 21-item Euthanasia Attitude Scale (EAS) questionnaire. Analysis of the data was conducted using SPSS version 29.0, employing measures such as mean, median, and standard deviation. The study revealed a strong level of reliability among the variables, with Cronbach’s Alpha values of 0.857 for EAS and 0.952 for reasons pertaining to euthanasia legalization. Pearson’s correlation coefficients ranged from 0.570 to 0.642, indicating a moderate and positive association between independent variables and the dependent variable. Furthermore, the study highlights that 81.3% of respondents held opposing views on euthanasia legalization, while 18.7% supported its legalization. Primary reasons for opposing legalization included religious beliefs (85.6%), the sanctity of human life and the belief that it should not be subject to individual authority for termination (80.2%), concerns about potential exploitation for personal gain (76.1%), and perceptions of public corruption (72.3%). These findings underscore the ongoing relevance and necessity for comprehensive examination, reflecting the multifaceted nature of the euthanasia discourse. Despite the prevailing opposition to legalization, the study underscores the enduring complexity of the euthanasia debate and the imperative of embracing diverse perspectives for effective navigation.