No abstract

This study examined the extent to which people think that the government is directly implicated each time an addictive substance user's health deteriorates. Eighty stories were composed according to a five within-subject orthogonal design: (a) scientific evidence available, (b) time since first concerns with substance dangerousness, (c) personal susceptibility, (d) level of consumption, and (c) current state policy regarding the substance: no information campaign and free market, no information campaign and state monopoly; information campaigns and free market, information campaigns and state monopoly; information campaigns and complete prohibition. Participants (236 adults aged 18-86) were asked to rate, in each case, the level of the government's responsibility. Participants associated user's health and government responsibility: It is only in the case of total prohibition that the government is perceived as relieved from any responsibility. Leftists tend to attribute more responsibility to the government than rightists, and rightists are more sensitive to scientific evidence than leftists. As long as citizens attribute heavy responsibility to the state's government for any health problem encountered by substance users, the government will not have any other choice than to stick to the most conservative policies.

The views of laypeople and professionals (nurses, occupational therapists, psychologists, and physicians) on the capacity to make informed decisions of elderly people with depression or dementia were examined. Participants were presented with vignettes created by varying the levels of three factors: (a) the type of decision (e.g., agreeing to surgery), (b) the health problem (e.g., slight depression), and (c) the availability of social support. Through cluster analysis, four different positions were found. Seventeen percent of the participants considered that even persons suffering from slight depression were already quite incapacitated. In contrast, 24% considered that only elderly people suffering from moderate or severe dementia were impaired. The majority of participants (59%) expressed positions that can be considered as pragmatic. Level of impairment was viewed as a function of severity of illness or type of illness. No significant differences were found between health professional and laypeople.