Framing California's End of Life Option Act: Social Movements, Medicine, and Dying.

California recently became the fifth state to permit physician aid in dying, which allows persons with terminal illnesses to request medications meant to hasten death. Despite growing public support for aid in dying, it is still inspires debate. Some patient advocacy groups and "right to die" movements construct aid in dying as empowering, while religious organizations, disability rights groups, and many medical providers are opposed to any interventions meant to hasten death. All of these groups engage with public opinion through the news media. In this paper, we analyze 71 opinion and editorial articles published in 6 major newspapers in California, from January 2015 to June 2016. Using content analysis to identify rhetorical elements and fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis to analyze how those rhetorical elements are used in combination, we compare articles that take a favorable, neutral, or oppositional stance toward the End of Life Option Act, which permits aid in dying. We find that the most common rhetorical tools are related to harm to patients and the political and legal process of passing the End of Life Option Act. Comparing combinations of rhetorical elements, we find that arguments in favor of aid in dying have simple, straightforward formulas, while those that are neutral or opposed use more varied and complex formulas. We conclude that as proponents have dominated public opinion, they are able to set the terms of the debate. Those taking neutral or oppositional stances then try to influence the public by redefining those terms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]