{"id":72620,"date":"2013-11-21T12:00:24","date_gmt":"2013-11-21T17:00:24","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/2013\/11\/21\/religious-groups-views-on-end-of-life-issues\/"},"modified":"2024-04-14T04:13:17","modified_gmt":"2024-04-14T09:13:17","slug":"religious-groups-views-on-end-of-life-issues","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/religion\/2013\/11\/21\/religious-groups-views-on-end-of-life-issues\/","title":{"rendered":"Religious Groups\u2019 Views on End-of-Life Issues"},"content":{"rendered":"

In the following summaries, religious leaders, scholars and ethicists from 16 major American religious groups explain how their faith traditions\u2019 teachings address physician-assisted suicide, euthanasia and other end-of-life questions. (For an in-depth look at public opinion on end-of-life issues, see \u201cViews on End-of-Life Medical Treatments<\/a>.\u201d And for an overview of the political, legal and ethical dimensions of the end-of-life debate, see \u201cTo End Our Days<\/a>.\u201d)<\/p>\n\n

Assemblies of God<\/h3>\n\n

The Assemblies of God, the largest Pentecostal denomination in the United States, opposes physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia. The denomination teaches that life is a sacred gift and that only God should determine when life ends. \u201cWe simply feel that it is not our prerogative to end life,\u201d says Edgar R. Lee, chairman of the church\u2019s Commission on Doctrinal Purity. \u201cGod is the giver of life, not us.\u201d<\/p>\n\n

[reject]<\/p>\n\n\n

For more information:<\/i>\nAssemblies of God statement. \u201cEuthanasia, and Extraordinary Support to Sustain Life.<\/a>\u201d<\/p>\n\n

Buddhism<\/h3>\n\n

According to Damien Keown, emeritus professor of Buddhist ethics at Goldsmiths College, University of London, Buddhists generally oppose assisted suicide and euthanasia. Buddhism teaches that it is morally wrong to destroy human life, including one\u2019s own, he says, even if the intention is to end suffering. Buddhists are taught to have a great respect for life, Keown says, even if that life is not being lived in optimal physical and mental health.<\/p>\n\n

However, he says, Buddhists also believe that life need not be preserved at all costs and that one does not need to go to extraordinary lengths to preserve a dying person\u2019s life. This means, for instance, that while a terminally ill person should not be denied basic care, he or she could refuse treatment that might prove to be futile or unduly burdensome. \u201cThe bottom line is that so long as there is no intention to take life, no moral problem arises,\u201d Keown says.<\/p>\n\n

For more information:<\/i>\nKeown, D. 2005. \u201cEnd of Life: The Buddhist View<\/a>.\u201d The Lancet, volume 366, pages 952-955. (PDF)<\/p>\n\n

Catholicism<\/h3>\n\n

The Roman Catholic Church strongly opposes physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia. The church teaches that life should not be prematurely shortened because it is a gift from God, says John A. Di Camillo, staff ethicist at the National Catholic Bioethics Center in Philadelphia, Pa. \u201cWe don\u2019t have the authority to take into our hands when life will end,\u201d he says. \u201cThat\u2019s the Creator\u2019s decision.\u201d<\/p>\n\n

Catholic thinkers like Di Camillo contend that the decision to take one\u2019s own life often comes as a result of issues like poor pain management, despair and loneliness, or the feeling of being a burden on family and others. These conditions, he believes, can be addressed with better palliative and psychological care. \u201cWe don\u2019t give enough attention to people near the end of life because we\u2019re afraid of the end of life and don\u2019t want to come to grips with it,\u201d Di Camillo says.<\/p>\n\n

At the same time, the church recognizes that a dying person has the moral option to refuse extraordinary treatments that only minimally prolong life. \u201cThe predominant distinction or criteria for legitimate refusal of treatment is whether the treatment in question is considered proportionate or disproportionate,\u201d Di Camillo says. This means patients can legitimately forgo \u201ctreatment that doesn\u2019t give a reasonable hope of physical or spiritual benefit, such as resuscitating someone who is at the very end of life,\u201d he says.<\/p>\n\n

For more information:<\/i>\nU.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. 2012. \u201cAssisted Suicide and Euthanasia: Beyond Terminal Illness<\/a>.\u201d (PDF)\nPriests for Life. \u201cBrief Reflections on Euthanasia<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n\n

Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon Church)<\/h3>\n\n

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints opposes physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia, believing that taking one\u2019s own life or the life of another violates God\u2019s commandments and his plan for each person.\u00a0\u201cWhile acknowledging the suffering experienced by many, we firmly believe in the sanctity of human life and in its role in God\u2019s plan,\u201d says Lyman Kirkland, a spokesman in the church\u2019s public affairs department.<\/p>\n\n

However, the church teaches that when someone is dying, it is acceptable to forgo excessive or extraordinary therapies. \u201cThe church does not believe that allowing a person to die from natural causes\u201d \u2013 removing a patient from artificial life support, for example \u2013 \u201cfalls within the definition of euthanasia,\u201d Kirkland says, adding that \u201cfamilies should not feel obligated to extend life by unreasonable means.\u201d<\/p>\n\n

For more information:<\/i>\nThe Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. \u201cEuthanasia and Prolonging Life<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n\n

Evangelical Lutheran Church in America<\/h3>\n\n

The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) opposes physician-assisted suicide and other efforts by medical professionals to speed a patient\u2019s death. Destroying life created in God\u2019s image is contrary to core church teachings, says the Rev. Roger Willer, the ELCA\u2019s director of theological ethics. \u201cLife is a gift from God, to be received with thanksgiving, and there is an integrity of the life process that should be respected,\u201d he says.<\/p>\n\n

At the same time, Willer says, the church teaches that there is no requirement to take extraordinary steps to keep a dying person alive a little longer. \u201cAllowing something to happen is different than actively hastening death,\u201d Willer says.<\/p>\n\n

For more information:<\/i>\nELCA Message. 1992. \u201cEnd of Life Decisions.<\/a>\u201d (PDF)<\/p>\n\n

Episcopal Church<\/h3>\n\n

In 1991, the Episcopal Church passed a resolution against assisted suicide and other forms of active euthanasia, stating that it is \u201cmorally wrong and unacceptable to take a human life in order to relieve the suffering caused by incurable illness.\u201d According to Timothy Sedgwick, a professor of Christian ethics at Virginia Theological Seminary, this teaching comes from the church\u2019s broader view \u201cthat one should never take a life, even your own.\u201d At the same time, Sedgwick says, there is a sense within the church that hard-and-fast rules on end-of-life issues may not fit every circumstance. \u201cAlthough we have a clear moral norm against the taking of human life, there may be cases that stand beyond judgment,\u201d he says.<\/p>\n\n

[ing]<\/p>\n\n\n

For more information:<\/i>\nEpiscopal Church Resolution. 1991. \u201cEstablish Principles With Regard to the Prolongation of Life.<\/a>\u201d<\/p>\n\n

Hinduism<\/h3>\n\n

While there is no formal Hindu teaching on assisted suicide or euthanasia, there is a general concern in Hinduism that prematurely ending a person\u2019s life could negatively impact their karma, says Deepak Sarma, a professor of South Asian religions and philosophy at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland. The concept of karma centers around the belief that good and bad occurrences in one\u2019s life are caused by actions taken in past lives, since Hindus believe in reincarnation. \u201cWe believe that whatever suffering you experience now is because of something you did in the past,\u201d Sarma says. \u201cSo if you circumvent karma by taking some action to stop suffering, you will pay for it later.\u201d In fact, Sarma says, the act of delaying suffering may further increase bad karma in the next life.<\/p>\n\n

[due to illness or infirmity]<\/p>\n\n\n

For more information:<\/i>\nBBC. 2009. \u201cEuthanasia, assisted dying, and suicide<\/a>.\u201d\nNimbalkar, N. \u201cEuthanasia: The Hindu Perspective<\/a>.\u201d (PDF)<\/p>\n\n

Islam<\/h3>\n\n

Islamic teachings oppose physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia. \u201cMuslims believe that life is sacred and comes from God; therefore it is a sin to take life,\u201d says David Stephen Powers, a professor of Near Eastern studies at Cornell University in Ithaca, N.Y.<\/p>\n\n

[these decisions]<\/p>\n\n\n

[more pure]<\/p>\n\n\n

While Islamic thinkers oppose hastening death, they also generally believe that the terminally ill need not employ extraordinary means and technologies to delay dying. \u201cWe are basically talking about the difference between a conscious decision to end life, which is wrong, and life ending by itself,\u201d Shabana says, adding that the line between the two is not always clearly defined.<\/p>\n\n

For more information:<\/i>\nAramesh, K., and Shadi, H. 2007. \u201cEuthanasia: An Islamic Ethical Perspective<\/a>.\u201d Iranian Journal of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology, volume 6, supplement 5, pages 35-38.<\/p>\n\n

Judaism<\/h3>\n\n

Under Jewish law, the directive to preserve human life generally outweighs other considerations, including the desire to alleviate pain and suffering. According to Rabbi Leonard A. Sharzer, associate director for bioethics at the Louis Finkelstein Institute for Religious and Social Studies at The Jewish Theological Seminary in New York City, Judaism teaches that life is a precious gift from God. A person\u2019s life belongs to God, he says, and therefore deciding when it ends should be left to God.<\/p>\n\n

[movements]<\/p>\n\n\n

[life]<\/p>\n\n\n

According to Jewish teachings, doctors and caregivers should not do anything to hasten death and generally must work to keep people alive as long as possible. However, Sharzer says, in dire cases \u201cthere is a distinction made between active and passive euthanasia, between killing and allowing to die.\u201d So, for example, most Jewish religious and ethical thinkers would agree that Judaism would allow for the cessation of life-prolonging treatment in the case of a dying person who is in a coma or vegetative state, he says.<\/p>\n\n

For more information:<\/i>\nBBC. 2009. \u201cEuthanasia and suicide<\/a>.\u201d\nRosner, F. \u201cEuthanasia: Jewish Biblical and Rabbinic Sources<\/a>.\u201d MyJewishLearning.com.<\/p>\n\n

National Baptist Convention<\/h3>\n\n

The National Baptist Convention, the largest historically black Protestant denomination in the United States, does not have a specific teaching on physician-assisted suicide or euthanasia. \u201cThis isn\u2019t an issue that we\u2019ve considered,\u201d says Charles Brown, a professor of Christian ethics at Payne Theological Seminary in Wilberforce, Ohio. However, he says, broader church teachings are in opposition to practices such as suicide and euthanasia because they prematurely end life. \u201cWithin the traditional teachings of our church \u2013 and black churches in general \u2013 there is this notion that the length of one\u2019s life is the providence of God, and you let it take its course,\u201d he says.<\/p>\n\n

[to forgo treatment]<\/p>\n\n\n

For more information:<\/i>\nThe National Baptist Convention, USA, Inc. \u201cWhat We Believe: Articles of Faith<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n\n

Presbyterian Church U.S.A.<\/h3>\n\n

The Presbyterian Church U.S.A. has examined theological questions related to end-of-life issues, but the denomination has not taken specific positions or provided guidance on assisted suicide or euthanasia. However, broader church teachings \u2013 including a belief in the intrinsic value of human life, the sovereignty of God and the need for health care workers to do no harm \u2013 would imply opposition to assisted suicide and active euthanasia or hastening death, according to Abigail Rian Evans, a Presbyterian minister and bioethicist. While Presbyterians \u201cdon\u2019t categorically rule out euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide, the burden of proof rests with the person taking the position in favor of these things,\u201d Evans says.<\/p>\n\n

According to Evans, a senior scholar at the Edmund D. Pellegrino Center for Clinical Bioethics and an adjunct professor in the Department of Family Medicine at Georgetown University Medical Center, refusal or withdrawal of treatment in cases involving a terminally ill patient would be viewed as more acceptable by her church. Forgoing treatment in such cases is different from assisted suicide or active euthanasia, she says, \u201cbecause it is the illness, rather than the withdrawal of treatment, that is ending life.\u201d<\/p>\n\n

For more information:<\/i>\nPresbyterian Church U.S.A. 1995. \u201cIn Life and In Death We Belong to God: Euthanasia, Assisted Suicide and End-of-Life Issues<\/a>.\u201d (PDF)<\/p>\n\n

Seventh-day Adventist Church<\/h3>\n\n

In 1992, the Seventh-day Adventist Church issued a statement opposing euthanasia and assisted suicide. This opposition is rooted partly in the Adventist belief that the physical body and the soul are permanently linked and that both will be resurrected after death, according to Roy Branson, associate dean of the School of Religion at Loma Linda University, an Adventist institution in Loma Linda, Calif. \u201cWe believe that there will be a bodily resurrection in the near future, and that heightens our value of each human life.\u201d He adds, \u201cLike many traditions, we put great value on life because life is a gift of God.\u201d<\/p>\n\n

At the same time, Branson says, the church does not believe \u201ceverything possible\u201d must be done to keep someone alive, \u201cparticularly when the dying patient doesn\u2019t want to be alive\u201d or is in severe pain. For example, the church\u2019s position statement on care for the dying states that patients are not obligated \u201cto accept medical interventions whose burdens outweigh the probable benefits.\u201d<\/p>\n\n

For more information:<\/i>\nSeventh-day Adventist Church. 1992. \u201cCare for the Dying<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n\n

Southern Baptist Convention<\/h3>\n\n

[s]<\/p>\n\n\n

At the same time, Mitchell says, the church recognizes that there is \u201can appropriate time to stop\u201d medical treatments.\u00a0Although the SBC generally opposes any action that may hasten death \u2013 including stopping regular medical treatment and the cessation of food and water \u2013 medical treatments that prolong the dying process are not obligatory. For instance, Mitchell says, an older person who is dying of kidney failure, is not a candidate for a transplant and has been reacting very badly to dialysis treatments should have the option to cease treatment. He asks: \u201cMust that person continue dialysis despite its ravaging effects on their body?\u00a0No, not in my view and not in the view of most Southern Baptists I know.\u201d<\/p>\n\n

For more information:<\/i>\nSouthern Baptist Convention. 1992. \u201cResolution on Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide<\/a>.\u201d\nSouthern Baptist Convention. 1996. \u201cResolution on Assisted Suicide<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n\n

United Church of Christ<\/h3>\n\n

The United Church of Christ supports the right of terminally ill patients to make their own decisions about when to die \u2013 including whether to hasten death. This position is in keeping with broader church teachings that stress the importance of respecting individual conscience and choice, according to the Rev. Timothy Tutt, a senior minister at Westmoreland Congregational United Church of Christ in Bethesda, Md. \u201cWe believe that each of us approaches God on our own terms, and this includes at the end of our lives,\u201d he says.<\/p>\n\n

According to Tutt, the church also supports the right of families to discontinue treatment for incapacitated loved ones who are near death or in a vegetative state. \u201cOnce again, this is a decision of conscience,\u201d he says, adding that families should base their decisions on what their minds and hearts tell them is best for their loved ones. Says Tutt: \u201cWe encourage people to ask: Am I being a wise or unwise steward of my parent\u2019s life by keeping her alive to the very end?\u201d<\/p>\n\n

For more information:<\/i>\nUnited Church of Christ. 2011. \u201cFaithfully Facing Dying: A Lenten Study Guide on Critical Issues and Decisions Surrounding Dying and Death<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n\n

Unitarian Universalist Association<\/h3>\n\n

In 1988, the Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations (UUA) passed a resolution advocating \u201cthe right to self-determination in dying.\u201d As a result, the church supports laws such as those in Oregon and Vermont that enable terminally ill patients, under carefully defined circumstances, to seek physician assistance in hastening their own death, says Gary Kowalski, interim minister at the Community Church of Chapel Hill in North Carolina. Unitarian Universalists also support the right of a legally designated proxy to make life-and-death decisions for a patient, including withdrawal of life support, in cases in which the patient is unable to make such choices.<\/p>\n\n

The UUA position on end-of-life issues is grounded in the church\u2019s teachings on the individual. \u201cOurs is a faith that honors the sanctity and integrity of the individual conscience,\u201d Kowalski says. \u201cThese ultimate questions of life and death belong with the person most intimately affected, not with the church, a legislative committee or a bureaucratic panel.\u201d<\/p>\n\n

For more information:<\/i>\nUnitarian Universalist General Resolution. 1988. \u201cThe Right to Die With Dignity<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n\n

United Methodist Church<\/h3>\n\n

[being]<\/p>\n\n\n

The church also opposes euthanasia, although there is no requirement that the terminally ill avail themselves of every possible treatment as long as their actions are not intended to hasten death. \u201cThere is a difference between not needlessly extending the dying process and accelerating it,\u201d Thobaben says.<\/p>\n\n

For more information:<\/i>\nThe United Methodist Church. 2004. The Book of Discipline of The United Methodist Church. \u201cSuicide<\/a>.\u201d\nThe United Methodist Church. 2004. Book of Resolutions. \u201cFaithful Care for Persons Suffering and Dying<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Religious leaders, scholars and ethicists from 16 major American religious groups explain how their faith traditions\u2019 teachings address physician-assisted suicide, euthanasia and other end-of-life questions. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":294,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"sub_headline":"","sub_title":"","_crdt_document":"","_prc_public_revisions":[],"_ppp_expiration_hours":0,"_ppp_enabled":false,"ai_generated_summary":"","relatedPosts":[],"reportMaterials":[{"key":"31264b75-e7dc-42a0-bd66-6069e70dcf3c","type":"report","url":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2013\/11\/end-of-life-religious-groups-views.pdf","attachmentId":86190}],"multiSectionReport":[],"package_parts__enabled":false,"package_parts":[],"_prc_fork_parent":0,"_prc_fork_status":"","_prc_active_fork":0,"datacite_doi":"","datacite_doi_citation":"","_prc_seo_qr_attachment_id":0,"spoken_article_player_enabled":true,"bylines":[{"key":"2e4c06ea-e0b9-48e2-a759-35d864833981","termId":2197}],"acknowledgements":[],"displayBylines":false,"footnotes":"","prc_watchers":[]},"categories":[165,196,372,106,105,207,172,163],"tags":[],"bylines":[],"collection":[],"datasets":[],"level_of_effort":[],"primary_audience":[],"information_type":[],"_post_visibility":[],"formats":[458],"_fund_pool":[],"languages":[],"regions-countries":[],"research-teams":[517],"workflow-status":[],"class_list":["post-72620","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-biotech","category-comparison-of-religions","category-death-dying","category-health-care","category-health-policy","category-older-adults-aging","category-religion-politics-1","category-religion-social-values","formats-report","research-teams-religion"],"label":false,"post_parent":0,"word_count":2602,"canonical_url":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/religion\/2013\/11\/21\/religious-groups-views-on-end-of-life-issues\/","art_direction":false,"_embeds":[],"watchers":[],"table_of_contents":[],"report_materials":[{"key":"31264b75-e7dc-42a0-bd66-6069e70dcf3c","type":"report","url":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2013\/11\/end-of-life-religious-groups-views.pdf","label":"","icon":"","attachmentId":86190}],"report_pagination":{"current_post":null,"next_post":null,"previous_post":null,"pagination_items":[]},"parent_info":{"parent_title":"Religious Groups\u2019 Views on End-of-Life Issues","parent_id":72620},"materialsOrdered":[{"key":"31264b75-e7dc-42a0-bd66-6069e70dcf3c","type":"report","url":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2013\/11\/end-of-life-religious-groups-views.pdf","label":"","attachmentId":86190,"icon":""}],"chaptersOrdered":[],"partsOrdered":[],"partsEnabled":false,"datacite_doi":"","prc_seo_data":{"title":"Religious Groups\u2019 Views on End-of-Life Issues","description":"Religious leaders, scholars and ethicists from 16 major American religious groups explain how their faith traditions\u2019 teachings address physician-assisted suicide, euthanasia and other end-of-life questions. ","og_title":"Religious Groups\u2019 Views on End-of-Life Issues","og_description":"Religious leaders, scholars and ethicists from 16 major American religious groups explain how their faith traditions\u2019 teachings address physician-assisted suicide, euthanasia and other end-of-life questions. ","schema_type":"Article","noindex":false,"canonical_url":"","primary_terms":{"category":8197291},"custom_schema":[],"og_image":0,"indexnow_submitted_at":null,"gsc_index_status":null},"prepublish_checks":{"prc-image-alt-text":{"status":"complete","message":"No image blocks in content.","data":null},"prc-about-this-research":{"status":"incomplete","message":"Add an \"About this research\" details block.","data":null},"prc-paragraph-count":{"status":"complete","message":"Found 44 paragraphs.","data":{"count":44}},"prc-internal-link":{"status":"complete","message":"Found 2 internal links.","data":{"count":2}}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"relatedPostsOrdered":[],"bylinesOrdered":[{"key":"2e4c06ea-e0b9-48e2-a759-35d864833981","termId":2197}],"acknowledgementsOrdered":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/72620","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/294"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=72620"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/72620\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":132031,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/72620\/revisions\/132031"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=72620"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=72620"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=72620"},{"taxonomy":"bylines","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/bylines?post=72620"},{"taxonomy":"collection","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/collection?post=72620"},{"taxonomy":"datasets","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/datasets?post=72620"},{"taxonomy":"level_of_effort","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/level_of_effort?post=72620"},{"taxonomy":"primary_audience","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/primary_audience?post=72620"},{"taxonomy":"information_type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/information_type?post=72620"},{"taxonomy":"_post_visibility","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/_post_visibility?post=72620"},{"taxonomy":"formats","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/formats?post=72620"},{"taxonomy":"_fund_pool","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/_fund_pool?post=72620"},{"taxonomy":"languages","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/languages?post=72620"},{"taxonomy":"regions-countries","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/regions-countries?post=72620"},{"taxonomy":"research-teams","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/research-teams?post=72620"},{"taxonomy":"workflow-status","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/workflow-status?post=72620"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}