Executive Summary of February 2007 Zogby International Poll
for Death with Dignity Vermont & End-of-Life Choices Vermont
Methodology
Zogby International conducted interviews of 541 adults chosen at random in Vermont. All calls were made from 2/16/07 through 2/20/07. The margin of error is +/- 4.3 percentage points. Some numbers displayed in this summary have been rounded to the nearest percent, and might not total 100. The current results show significantly stronger support for end-of-life legislation than a similar poll which was conducted in 2004.
Zogby International’s sampling and weighting procedures also have been validated through its political polling: more than 95% of the firm’s polls have come within 1% of actual election-day outcomes.
Narrative Analysis
People express different views about issues having to do with people who are dying of a terminal disease. Which of the following statements comes closer to your point of view? (Note: callers rotated the order in which they read these statements.)
Statement A. If I am terminally ill, within six months of dying and with no hope of recovery, the decision about when I should be able to bring a peaceful end to my suffering is mine to make in accordance with my wishes and in consultation with my family and loved ones.
Statement B. Given the sacredness of human life, only God should decide when my life ends.
Statement A 81%
Statement B 14%
Neither 2%
Not sure 2%
Vermonters are five times as likely to say that they – rather than God – should be able to decide when their life should end if terminally ill. Four in five (81%) feel the decision to end their life should be theirs in accordance with their wishes and in consultation with family and loved ones. In comparison, one in seven (14%) believes only God should decide when life ends. It is important to note that Statement B specifically utilizes the language that the opposition commonly uses.
The belief that the terminally ill patient should have the right to choose the timing of death is prevalent throughout most of the sample, as a majority across most demographics, including age, religion, political ideology, income bracket, and level of education, sides with Statement A. A majority of residents in all 14 Vermont counties also agrees with the view that terminally ill individuals, within six months of dying, should be able to choose the manner and timing of their deaths. Those who say they or a member of their family is disabled also strongly support (76%) Statement A.
Would you support or oppose legislation to allow a mentally competent adult, dying of a terminal disease, the choice to request and receive medication from a physician to peacefully end suffering and hasten death?
Support Legislation 82%
Oppose Legislation 14 %
Not sure 5%
More than four in five Vermonters (82%) would support legislation to allow a mentally competent adult, dying of a terminal disease, the choice to request and receive medication from a physician to peacefully end suffering and hasten death. In comparison, only one in seven (14%) is opposed. A majority in every sub-group, except those who attend religious services more than once a week, support such legislation. Three years ago, 48% of born-again Christians opposed such legislation; today 35% are opposed. A majority of every ideology, including self-identified conservatives (66%), would support this legislation.
These extraordinary numbers demonstrate the overwhelming support that the people of Vermont have for giving themselves, their families and loved ones, and their fellow Vermonters, the right to maintain dignity and control at the ends of their lives.
Would you be more likely or less likely to support such legislation if it included safeguards to protect the individual, including assurances that the patient is mentally capable, that two physicians have determined the patient has less than six months to live, that hospice and pain management options are understood and available, and that only the patient can administer the medication or would it make no difference? (This question was asked only of those who opposed the legislation.)
2007 response 2004 response
More likely to support the legislation 23% 55%
Less likely to support the legislation 54% 12%
No difference in support for the legislation 22% 28%
Not sure 1% 6%
A majority of those who initially are opposed to this legislation say they are less likely to support such legislation even with safeguards. One in four opposed say they would be more likely to support the legislation knowing about the safeguards, while 22% say the safeguards make no difference. The results in 2007 are the opposite of results in 2004. However, keeping in mind that support for the legislation increased and all the increase in support seems to have come from those who would have been opposed three years ago, it appears that those who are still opposed are hard-core opposed, so little can be offered that would change their minds.
Would you be more likely or less likely to vote for a candidate who supported such legislation, including the safeguards, or would the candidate’s position not have an effect on your vote?
More likely to vote for candidate who supports legislation 43%
Less likely to vote for candidate who supports legislation 11%
No difference in support for candidate who supports legislation 40%
Not sure 5%
A plurality or majority in nearly all sub-groups say they would be more likely to support a candidate who supported such legislation.
Do you agree or disagree with this statement: There are important individual end of life decisions we all face. We need to respect people’s ability to make their own decisions and not impose our values and views upon them.
Agree 91%
Disagree 7%
Not sure 3%
Do you agree or disagree with this statement: I want peace of mind at the end of my life, and having a full range of options and the privacy to make my own choice will help give me that peace of mind.
Agree 91%
Disagree 7%
Not sure 3%
A majority in every sub-group agree with both statements. Also, a majority of both born-again Christians (77% agree with the need to respect others’ ability to make decisions; 77% agree that they personally want the full range of options available to them) and those who attend religious services more than once a week (66% agree with the need to respect others’ ability to make decisions; 65% agree that they personally want the full range of options available to them) agree with both statements.