How the public responded to the Schiavo controversy: evidence from letters to editors.
How the public responded to the Schiavo controversy: evidence from letters to editors.
复制标题
公众如何回应夏沃争议：来自给编辑的信中的证据。
DOI：
10.1136/jme.2010.037804
复制
发表时间：
2010
影响因子：
4.1
通讯作者：
Illes,Judy
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Racine,Eric;Karczewska,Marta;Seidler,Matthew;Amaram,Rakesh;Illes,Judy
重大公共临床伦理争议的历史和起源与媒体报道中的意见和回应的发表密切相关。为了提供一个样本的公众反应在媒体上，本文报告的内容分析的结果，在四个最多产的美国报纸的编辑发表的夏沃争议。抽样信件中表达的意见强烈支持使用生前遗嘱，并强烈谴责公众对案件的关注以及政治干预。信件往往是反对撤回生命支持、代理同意和相关程序，以及反对法院判决和法律的程序。与记者撰写的报告相比，给编辑的信中关于夏沃的神经系统状况和行为的争议较少，但类似的语言描述了生命支持的撤回。不同的利益攸关方可能会有不同的公共话语，这表明即使在媒体内部也存在复杂和广泛的多元化。
The history and genesis of major public clinical ethics controversies is intimately related to the publication of opinions and responses in media coverage. To provide a sample of public response in the media, this paper reports the results of a content analysis of letters to editors published in the four most prolific American newspapers for the Schiavo controversy. Opinions expressed in the letters sampled strongly supported the use of living wills and strongly condemned public attention to the case as well as political interventions. Letters tended to be against withdrawal of life support, proxy consent and associated procedures as well as against court decisions and legal procedures. In comparison with reports written by journalists, letters to editors contained fewer controversial claims about Schiavo''s neurological condition and behavioural repertoire but similar loaded language to describe withdrawal of life support. Distinct public discourses can be encountered in different stakeholders suggesting complex and extensive pluralism even within the media.