The euthanasia referendum took place at the same time as the cannabis referendum. It attracted much less attention than the cannabis one, probably because a vote in favour of reform appeared to be inevitable from the beginning. In the end, 1,893,290 people voted in favour of euthanasia, with only 979,079 against, meaning that 65.1% were in favour of reform.
Although the euthanasia issue is usually presented as one of religious morality, it’s much more complicated than that.
As with the cannabis referendum, the normal ballots for both General Electorates and Maori Electorates were placed in the same box, making it impossible to draw meaningful statistical inferences about voting patterns. This chapter, therefore, focuses on special votes only.
| Variable | Special voting Yes for euthanasia |
| No religion | 0.27 |
| Buddhism | 0.36 |
| Christianity | -0.39 |
| Hinduism | 0.16 |
| Islam | 0.09 |
| Judaism | 0.62 |
| Maori religions | -0.31 |
| Spiritualism and New Age | 0.14 |
It’s true that, as with cannabis law reform, the main opponents to euthanasia were Christians. Perhaps surprising to most, however, sentiments were not particularly strong about the topic in either direction. Although the correlation between being Christian and special voting Yes in the euthanasia referendum was significantly negative, at -0.39, this was weaker than the correlation between being Christian and special voting Yes in the cannabis referendum (-0.48).
Spiritualists and New Agers, Buddhists, Hindus, Jews and the non-religious were the most likely to special vote Yes in the euthanasia referendum. These groups don’t tend to have superstitious beliefs about keeping people alive even when terminally suffering, which is primarily a Christian belief, itself a consequence of the Christian non-belief in reincarnation.
Also surprising is that the correlation between special voting Yes in the euthanasia referendum and having no religion was only 0.27. This was significant, but only barely so.
The fact that it was significant reveals the extent to which materialists in general support legal access to euthanasia. The fact that it was only barely so reveals the extent to which superstitions around death are universal in nature and not restricted to the followers of any particular religious tradition.
| Variable | Special voting Yes for euthanasia |
| No qualifications | -0.73 |
| Level 1 certificate | -0.59 |
| Level 2 certificate | -0.57 |
| Level 3 certificate | 0.07 |
| Level 4 certificate | -0.60 |
| Level 5 diploma | -0.54 |
| Level 6 diploma | 0.23 |
| Bachelor’s degree | 0.69 |
| Honours degree | 0.75 |
| Master’s degree | 0.75 |
| Doctorate | 0.61 |
Underlining the degree to which fear of euthanasia is mostly an irrational one, but not necessarily religious in origin, are the correlations between educational attainment and special voting Yes in the euthanasia referendum.
The correlation of -0.73 between having no NZQA qualifications and special voting Yes in the euthanasia referendum was much stronger than any correlation between religious belief and special voting Yes, whether negative or positive. This correlation cannot entirely be explained by appealing to the fact that older people, who tend to be more conservative on such issues, tend to also be less well educated (see below).
Likewise, the correlations between having a Master’s degree or an honours degree and special voting Yes in the euthanasia referendum were both 0.75. This is probably because educated people have thought about the issue more, and are more likely to conclude that death is nothing to fear, and that forcing the terminally ill to stay alive is immoral.
Historically, the strongest pro-euthanasia support has come from those educated into a scientific materialist framework. This is probably because such people have the least superstitious worry about going to Hell if they end their own lives.
| Variable | Special voting Yes for euthanasia |
| Working in agriculture, forestry or fishing | -0.37 |
| Working in mining | -0.17 |
| Working in manufacturing | -0.66 |
| Working in electricity, gas, water or wastewater | -0.24 |
| Working in construction | -0.21 |
| Working in wholesale trade | 0.00 |
| Working in retail trade | -0.25 |
| Working in accommodation or food services | 0.31 |
| Working in transport, postal or warehousing | -0.42 |
| Working in information media or telecommunications | 0.62 |
| Working in financial or insurance services | 0.56 |
| Working in rental, hiring or real estate services | 0.49 |
| Working in professional, scientific or technical services | 0.74 |
| Working in administrative or support services | -0.01 |
| Working in public administration or safety | 0.20 |
| Working in education or training | 0.09 |
| Working in healthcare or social assistance | -0.18 |
| Working in arts and recreation services | 0.54 |
There are strong correlations between the average education level of an occupation and that occupation’s willingness to special vote Yes in the euthanasia referendum.
The strongest positive correlations between working in a particular occupation and special voting Yes in the euthanasia referendum were for the typically highly-educated professions such as professional, scientific or technical services (0.74), information media and telecommunications (0.62) or financial and insurance services (0.56).
The typically poorly-educated professions were much less likely to support euthanasia. The correlation between voting Yes in the euthanasia referendum and working in manufacturing was -0.66; with working in transport, postal or warehousing it was -0.42; with working in agriculture, forestry or fishing it was -0.37.
It might seem strange that education level was a much stronger predictor of opposition to euthanasia than religion. After all, the ban on euthanasia was initially motivated by religious sentiments. It appears that superstition is highly prevalent among the poorly-educated in New Zealand, even more so than among the religious.
| Variable | Special voting Yes for euthanasia |
| Working as manager | 0.28 |
| Working as professional | 0.70 |
| Working as a technician or trades worker | -0.44 |
| Working as community or personal services worker | -0.24 |
| Working as clerical or administrative worker | 0.11 |
| Working as sales worker | -0.00 |
| Working as machinery operator or driver | -0.62 |
| Working as labourer | -0.64 |
As with industries, professions were much more likely to support euthanasia if they were educated.
The best-educated profession is working as a professional, and the correlation between special voting Yes for euthanasia and working as a professional was a very strong 0.70. Working as a manager was also significantly correlated with special voting Yes for euthanasia, although the correlation was much weaker, at 0.28.
The least-educated professions had the strongest negative correlations with special voting Yes for euthanasia. These were working as a machinery operator or driver (-0.62) and being a labourer (-0.64). To some extent these correlations can also be explained by the fact that many machinery operators, drivers and labourers are Maori or Pacific Islander, who tended to oppose euthanasia.
| Variable | Special voting Yes for euthanasia |
| Age 20-24 | 0.43 |
| Age 25-29 | 0.50 |
| Age 30-34 | 0.44 |
| Age 35-39 | 0.31 |
| Age 40-44 | 0.23 |
| Age 45-49 | 0.21 |
| Age 50-54 | 0.07 |
| Age 55-59 | -0.10 |
| Age 60-64 | -0.15 |
| Age 65-69 | -0.13 |
| Age 70-74 | -0.12 |
| Age 75-79 | -0.15 |
| Age 80-84 | -0.18 |
| Age 85+ | -0.08 |
Young people are, of course, more removed from death than older people. This could perhaps lead to them being more blase about the subject, explaining their support for euthanasia. Old people are significantly more Christian than young people, but did not vote against euthanasia in significant numbers. The truth is that euthanasia has reasonably broad support across all age groups.
All of the age groups from 45-49 years old and above had no significant correlation with special voting Yes in the euthanasia referendum. This result will surprise the many who would have expected significant negative correlations. Old Christians seem to be much less against euthanasia than they were against cannabis – perhaps because euthanasia prohibition threatens to cause suffering to them, whereas cannabis prohibition mostly causes suffering to others.
| Variable | Special voting Yes for euthanasia |
| No children | 0.66 |
| One child | 0.00 |
| Two children | -0.12 |
| Three children | -0.49 |
| Four children | -0.67 |
| Five children | -0.65 |
| Six or more children | -0.55 |
One of the strongest correlations was between special voting Yes in the euthanasia referendum and having no children – this was 0.66. This can mostly be explained by the existence of a strong correlation between special voting Yes in the euthanasia referendum and having no NZQA qualifications.
There was a correlation of -0.67 between having four children and special voting Yes in the euthanasia referendum. This might best be explained by reference to the fact that those with four children tend to be less well educated than the average, and the less well educated tend to oppose euthanasia.
An alternative explanation is that those with the strongest pro-life sentiments will both have many children and oppose euthanasia. These sentiments, contrary to popular belief, are far from necessarily Christian. Some will be, but most not.
| Variable | Special voting Yes for euthanasia |
| Yearly income < $5,000 | 0.03 |
| Yearly income $5,000-$10,000 | 0.14 |
| Yearly income $10,000-$20,000 | -0.54 |
| Yearly income $20,000-$30,000 | -0.53 |
| Yearly income $30,000-$50,000 | -0.60 |
| Yearly income $50,000-$70,000 | 0.12 |
| Yearly income $70,000+ | 0.69 |
This set of correlations is unusual. They start relatively neutral, then become significantly negative as people become wealthier, and then become significantly positive as people become still wealthier. This is different to the usual linear pattern seen in correlations between e.g. education and income.
Probably this pattern can best be explained by appeal to the fact that the wealthiest segment of the population is also the most highly-educated, whereas the middle-wealthiest segment is the poorest educated, and the poorest segment of the population, because it is mostly comprised of students, pensioners and young workers, is a blend of both.
Therefore, the wealthiest and most highly-educated Kiwis special voted Yes for euthanasia, the middle-wealthy and most poorly-educated Kiwis voted against it, and the poorest and middle-educated Kiwis were inbetween the two.
| Variable | Special voting Yes for euthanasia |
| Born in New Zealand | -0.40 |
A very curious result is that those born in NZ were significantly less likely to vote for euthanasia. Being NZ-born made a person even more likely to vote against euthanasia than being a Christian did.
This is primarily a function of the fact that NZ-born voters are significantly less educated than foreign-born ones, and poorly-educated people voted heavily against euthanasia. The sort of person who immigrates to a foreign country tends to be the sort of person who is not superstitious.
| Variable | Special voting Yes for euthanasia |
| NZ European | 0.13 |
| Maori | -0.32 |
| Pacific Islander | -0.22 |
| Asian | 0.28 |
There were no strong correlations between belonging to a particular race and voting a particular way in the euthanasia referendum. There was a significant negative correlation between being Maori and special voting Yes in the euthanasia referendum, and there was a significant positive correlation between being Asian and special voting Yes. However, neither was particularly strong.
Perhaps the most curious outcome here is the fact that Asians were the race most likely to vote in favour of euthanasia law reform, at the same time as being the race least likely to vote in favour of cannabis law reform. This is especially noteworthy given the strength of the correlation between special voting Yes for euthanasia and special voting Yes for cannabis (see below).
Also noteworthy is the fact that Maoris and Pacific Islanders voted similarly on euthanasia, when their votes were very different on cannabis. Just because pan-Pacific opposition to some reforms (like euthanasia) might exist, doesn’t mean that it exists with regard to other reforms (like cannabis).
| Variable | Special voting Yes for euthanasia |
| Special vote Yes for cannabis | 0.74 |
One of the strongest correlations of all was between special voting Yes in the euthanasia referendum and special voting Yes in the cannabis referendum. This is because Yes voters in both instances tended to be young and well-educated. Most people in this category felt that both euthanasia prohibition and cannabis prohibition were antiquated laws that reflected the morality of a bygone age.
The major difference between the two is that those special voting Yes in the euthanasia referendum tended to be foreign-born, whereas those special voting Yes in the cannabis referendum were more likely to be New Zealand-born.
| Variable | Special vote Yes for euthanasia |
| Voting Labour 2020 | -0.09 |
| Voting National 2020 | 0.17 |
| Voting Greens 2020 | 0.70 |
| Voting ACT 2020 | 0.17 |
| Voting New Zealand First 2020 | -0.28 |
| Voting Maori Party 2020 | -0.21 |
| Voting New Conservative 2020 | -0.21 |
| Voting The Opportunities Party 2020 | 0.60 |
| Voting Advance NZ 2020 | -0.31 |
| Voting Sustainable NZ 2020 | 0.47 |
| Voting ALCP 2020 | -0.31 |
| Voting TEA Party 2020 | 0.13 |
| Voting Heartland NZ 2020 | -0.02 |
| Voting Social Credit 2020 | -0.21 |
| Voting NZ Outdoors Party 2020 | -0.16 |
| Voting ONE Party 2020 | -0.30 |
| Voting Vision NZ Party 2020 | -0.23 |
The party correlations provide more evidence for the trends already outlined.
The parties with well-educated voters tended to support euthanasia. The correlation between special voting Yes in the euthanasia referendum and voting Greens was 0.70; with voting The Opportunities Party it was 0.60; with voting Sustainable NZ it was 0.47. All of these parties make a point of basing their opinions on evidence, and therefore they reject the “if you kill yourself you go to Hell” narrative.
Advance NZ and ALCP had two of the most poorly-educated voting blocs, and those blocs were also the least likely to support euthanasia. The correlation between special voting Yes for euthanasia and voting for either party in 2020 was significantly negative, at -0.31. There was also negative correlations between special voting Yes for euthanasia and voting ONE Party, Vision NZ, Maori Party or New Conservatives.
Considering that ACT voters tend to be highly educated, and that many of them are Chinese (who tend to support euthanasia), it might seem surprising that the correlation between voting ACT in 2020 and special voting Yes for euthanasia was only 0.17. This can be explained by the fact that ACT voters in 2020 were much older than they usually are, and old people tended to oppose euthanasia.
| Variable | Special vote Yes for euthanasia |
| Median income | 0.55 |
| Mean income | 0.65 |
There were strong correlations between personal wealth and support for euthanasia. The correlation between special voting Yes for euthanasia and median income was 0.55, and with mean income it was 0.65. These two correlations lay bare the extent to which the people near the top of society supported euthanasia reform.
It’s not likely that wealth, by itself, makes a person more likely to support euthanasia. More likely it’s education that does so, and since wealth is highly correlated with education it’s also correlated with support for euthanasia.
In summary, those who cast a special vote for Yes in the euthanasia referendum were primarily well-educated. They varied greatly in race, income, religion and age, but the strongest correlations with special voting Yes for euthanasia were with educational levels.
Euthanasia, unlike cannabis, was an issue on which the ruling class were mostly agreed. This is, at least partly, because the ruling class is almost entirely materialist. This materialism apparently makes it easier to see the benefit in “death with dignity” measures such as euthanasia, but does not make it easier to see the benefit in legalising spiritual sacraments such as cannabis.
*
This article is an excerpt from the upcoming 3rd Edition of Understanding New Zealand, by Dan McGlashan and published by VJM Publishing. Understanding New Zealand is the comprehensive guide to the demographics and voting patterns of the New Zealand people.
*
If you enjoyed reading this essay/article, you can get a compilation of the Best VJMP Essays and Articles from 2021 from Amazon for Kindle or Amazon for CreateSpace (for international readers), or TradeMe (for Kiwis). A compilation of the Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2019, the Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2018 and the Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2017 are also available.
*
If you would like to support our work in other ways, subscribe to our SubscribeStar fund, or make a donation to our Paypal! Even better, buy any one of our books!