Death Control

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
What appears to be an emerging public acceptance of death control has followed a meaning-of-death developmental sequence from (1) supernatural control to (2) biological control to (3) social-symbolic control. The “social death” concept is beginning to take its place beside the “biological death” concept. Belief that biological factors should control death, which incorporates belief in instinctive self-preservation and instinctive fear of death, is being replaced by interpretations summarized in the statement that the behavior of an individual as he confronts death and dying is in response to symbols (meaning) and is relative to the audience and the situation. People are increasingly questioning the beliefs that (1) biological preservation is inherently of greater worth than preservation of the social-symbolic image of the dying, which includes self-definitions productive of dignity, and (2) whether bureaucratic hospital dying is always preferable to dying at home.

This publication has 2 references indexed in Scilit: