Lifelines and End-of-life Decision-making: An Anthropological Analysis of Advance Care Directives in Cross-cultural Contexts

Ethnos ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 1-19 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tanya Zivkovic
2016 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 267-274 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mi-Kyung Song ◽  
Maureen Metzger ◽  
Sandra E Ward

Background: Few studies have examined the process and impact of an advance care planning intervention experienced by surrogate decision-makers of dialysis patients. Aim: To explore the perspectives of the bereaved surrogates of dialysis patients on the process and impact of an advance care planning intervention and to compare the perceived impacts of the intervention between African Americans and Whites. Design: Qualitative interviews and thematic analysis. Setting/participants: 24 bereaved surrogates of patients from outpatient dialysis centers were interviewed. Both patients and surrogates had been participants in a larger efficacy study and had received an advance care planning intervention, SPIRIT (Sharing Patient’s Illness Representations to Increase Trust). Results: Two themes related to the process of SPIRIT were as follows: (1) SPIRIT provided a welcome opportunity to think about and discuss topics that had been avoided and (2) SPIRIT helped patients and surrogates to share their feelings. Four themes of the SPIRIT’s impact were as follows: (1) SPIRIT was an eye-opening experience, acquiring knowledge and understanding of the patient’s illness and end-of-life care, (2) SPIRIT helped strengthen relationships between patients and surrogates, (3) SPIRIT helped surrogates feel prepared during the time leading up to end-of-life decision-making, and (4) SPIRIT helped surrogates have peace of mind during and after actual end-of-life decision-making. Themes related to SPIRIT’s impact on feeling prepared for end-of-life decision-making and the actual decision-making experience more frequently occurred in African Americans than in Whites. Conclusion: Our data may help explain the beneficial effects of SPIRIT on surrogates, but future trials should include data on control surrogates’ perspectives.


2021 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 233372142110217
Author(s):  
Irma Huayanay ◽  
Celia Pantoja ◽  
Chelsea Chang

COVID-19 pandemic brought difficult scenarios that patients and families are facing about end- of-life decisions. This exposed some weak areas in the healthcare system where we can continue improve in reducing disparities and emphasizing advance care planning from a primary level of care. We present a case of challenges in end-of-life decision-making in a Latino patient.


2011 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 143-165 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jung Kwak ◽  
Jessica Y. Allen ◽  
William E. Haley

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carla Kotzé ◽  
Johannes Lodewikus Roos ◽  
René Ehlers

Background: The study's main aim was to assess the end-of-life decision-making capacity and health-related values of older people with serious mental illness.Methods: A cross-sectional, observational study, was done at Weskoppies Psychiatric Hospital, Gauteng Province, South Africa that included 100 adults older than 60 years of age and diagnosed with serious mental illness. The Mini-Cog and a semi-structured clinical assessment of end-of-life decision-making capacity was done before a standardized interview, Assessment of Capacity to Consent to Treatment, was administered. This standardized instrument uses a hypothetical vignette to assess decision-making capacity and explores healthcare-related values.Results: The Assessment of Capacity to Consent to Treatment scores correlated (p < 0.001) with the outcomes of the semi-structured decision-making capacity evaluation. Significant correlations with impaired decision-making capacity included: lower scores on the Mini-Cog (p < 0.001); a duration of serious mental illness of 30–39 years (p = 0025); having a diagnosis of schizophrenia spectrum disorders (p = 0.0007); and being admitted involuntarily (p < 0.0001). A main finding was that 65% of participants had decision-making capacity for end-of-life decisions, were able to express their values and engage in advance care discussions.Discussion and Conclusion: Healthcare providers have a duty to initiate advance care discussions, optimize decision-making capacity, and protect autonomous decision-making. Many older patients with serious mental illness can engage in end-of-life discussions and can make autonomous decisions about preferred end-of-life care. Chronological age or diagnostic categories should never be used as reasons for discrimination, and older people with serious mental illness should receive end-of-life care in keeping with their preferences and values.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document