In Cases of Euthanasia, Men Most Often Kill Women

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Colorado State University psychologist Silvia Sara Canetto recently uncovered a curious statistic: two thirds of the people who die in so-called mercy killings are women. Moreover, most of these women are killed by men. "Many people may view women's high rates of death by mercy killing as an indication of men's beneficence or of women's healthy pragmatism, rational thinking and self-determination," Canetto says. "Yet one should be wary of those who present mercy killing as a gift to women. These are fatal gifts, embedded in a long tradition of legitimizing women's sacrifice."

To study trends in euthanasia, Canetto and graduate student Janet Hollenshead examined more than three decades worth of records kept by the Hemlock Society, an organization that advocates mercy killing and assisted suicide. Because the Hemlock Society defines mercy killing as "the killing of a terminally or incurably ill person to put him or her out of perceived misery" without needing to know "the intent of the suffering person," some 85 percent of the records contained no information on whether the victim had in fact requested to die. Among cases in which the victim's age was given, more than 70 percent were 60 or older. Only about a third of the victims described as sick had terminal illnesses.

"Men take lives, their own and others, more often than women," Canetto comments. "Still, it is not clear at present why men are more likely to mercy kill women rather than other men." She does, however, offer some theories on why women are more likely to die. They may internalize social patterns that devalue women's lives and therefore ask to die instead of asking for support. And requests to die may hide underlying depression.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


"If older women are uniquely affected by the legalization of hastened death, then policies presented as 'neutral,' enhancing self-determination, dignity and choice in death may actually be dangerous to older women," Canetto says. "Many women do not have the resources, the sense of entitlement or the power and freedom to make the choice they desire, especially when they are sick and disabled, and the freedom to be dead is a very peculiar freedom.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe