Palliative Care/Physician-Assisted Dying: Alternative or Continuing Care?

2006 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-44 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marion Malakoff
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
End Of Life ◽  
Advance Directives ◽  
Assisted Suicide ◽  
Life Support ◽  
Care Physician ◽  
Physician Assisted Suicide ◽  
Dying Patients ◽  
Physician Assisted Dying ◽  
Wrongful Death

End-of-life care for dying patients has become an issue of importance to physicians as well as patients. The debate centers around whether the option of physician-assisted suicide cuts off, or diminishes the value of, palliative care. This ongoing attention makes the crafting of advance directives from patients detailing their end-of-life choices essential. Equally important is the appointment of a health care surrogate. The surrogate, when the patient is too ill to make decisions, should be empowered to make them in his stead. No American court has found a clinician liable for wrongful death for granting a request to refuse life support. An entirely separate issue is that of legalized physician-assisted suicide. As of this writing, only Oregon has made this legal (see Gonzales v. Oregon). It is likely that this issue will be pursued slowly through the state courts, making advance directives and surrogacy all the more crucial.

scholarly journals ASPEK ETIKA DAN LEGAL EUTHANASIA

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Taufik Suryadi ◽  
Kulsum Kulsum
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
End Of Life ◽  
Assisted Suicide ◽  
Life Support ◽  
Medical Science ◽  
Final Decision ◽  
Physician Assisted Suicide ◽  
Definition Of Death ◽  
Definition Of

Abstrak. Isu-isu tentang akhir kehidupan (end of life) selalu menarik untuk dibicarakan. Penentuan akhir kehidupan ini sering menjadi dilema bagi para dokter karena apabila dokter tidak memahami tentang pengambilan keputusan akhir hidup pasien ia akan menghadapi konsekuensi bioetika dan medikolegal. Terdapat beberapa istilah yang berkaitan dengan isu akhir kehidupan yaitu euthanasia, withholding and withdrawal life support, physician assisted suicide, dan  palliative care. Dengan berkembangnya ilmu kedokteran dan teknologi, definisi kematian menjadi sulit ditentukan karena dengan bantuan alat canggih kedokteran kehidupan ‘dapat diperpanjang’. Dari kenyataan inilah maka timbul pertanyaan serius: “Sampai kapan dokter harus mempertahankan kehidupan?. Apakah semua jenis pengobatan dan perawatan yang dapat  memperpanjang hidup manusia itu harus selalu diberikan?”.Dari permasalahan ini dapat didiskusikan tentang euthanasia ditinjau dari sudut bioetika dan medikolegal. Kata kunci: euthanasia, aspek bioetika, aspek medikolegal  Abstract .The issues of end of life are always interesting to discussed. This final determination of life is often a dilemma for doctors because if the doctor does not understand the final decision of the patient's life he will face the consequences of bioethics and medicolegal. There are several terms related to the issues of end of life that is euthanasia, withholding and withdrawal life support, physician assisted suicide, and palliative care. With the development of medical science and technology, the definition of death becomes difficult to determine because with the help of advanced medical devices 'life can be extended'. It is from this fact that a serious question arises: "How long should doctors maintain life? Are all types of cure and care that can extend the life of a human should always be given? "From this issues can be discussed about euthanasia in terms of bioethics and medicolegal. Keywords: euthanasia, bioethics aspect, medicolegal aspect

Terminal Sedation: Palliative Care for Intractable Pain, Post Glucksberg and Quill

2003 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-76
Author(s):  
Rob McStay
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Assisted Suicide ◽  
Life Support ◽  
Intractable Pain ◽  
Terminal Sedation ◽  
Physician Assisted Suicide ◽  
The Right ◽  
Artificial Life Support ◽  
Unconscious State

In 1997, the U.S. Supreme Court tacitly endorsed terminal sedation as an alternative to physician-assisted suicide, thus intensifying a debate in the legal and medical communities as to the propriety of terminal sedation and setting the stage for a new battleground in the “right to die” controversy. Terminal sedation is the induction of an unconscious state to relieve otherwise intractable distress, and is frequently accompanied by the withdrawal of any life-sustaining intervention, such as hydration and nutrition. This practice is a clinical option of “last resort” when less aggressive palliative care measures have failed. Terminal sedation has also been described as “the compromise in the furor over physician-assisted suicide.”Medical literature suggests that terminal sedation was a palliative care option long before the Supreme Court considered the constitutional implications of physician-assisted suicide. Terminal sedation has been used for three related but distinct purposes: (1) to relieve physical pain; (2) to produce an unconscious state before the withdrawal of artificial life support; and (3) to relieve non-physical suffering.

Factors that Influence End-Of-Life Decision Making Amongst Attending Physicians

2021 ◽  
pp. 104990912110638
Author(s):  
Suraj Pai ◽  
Tracy Andrews ◽  
Amber Turner ◽  
Aziz Merchant ◽  
Michael Shapiro
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
End Of Life ◽  
Work Experience ◽  
Assisted Suicide ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Care Physician ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
Physician Assisted Suicide ◽  
Eol Care ◽  
Attending Physicians

Background: Medical advances prolong life and treat illness but many patients have chronically debilitating conditions that prevent them from making end-of-life (EOL) decisions for themselves. These situations are difficult to navigate for both patient and physician. This study investigates physicians’ feelings and approach toward EOL care, physician-assisted suicide (PAS), and euthanasia. Methods: An anonymous, self-administered online survey was distributed through the New Jersey Medical School servers and American College of Surgeons forums. The survey presented clinical EOL vignettes and subjective questions regarding PAS and euthanasia. Results: We obtained 142 responses from attending physicians. Respondents were typically male (61%), married (85%), identified as Christian (54%), had more than 20 years of experience (55%), and worked at a university hospital (57%). Religious beliefs and years of work experience seemed to be significant contributors in EOL decision making, whereas gender and medical specialty were not significantly influential. Conclusion: Factors such as years of work experience and religious belief may influence medical professionals’ opinions about PAS and euthanasia and their subsequent actions regarding EOL care. In many cases, the boundaries are blurred and require further study before concrete conclusions can be made.

Can Physician-Assisted Suicide Be Regulated Effectively?

1996 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 225-232 ◽  
Author(s):  
Franklin G. Miller ◽  
Howard Brody ◽  
Timothy E. Quill
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
New York ◽  
Palliative Care ◽  
Assisted Suicide ◽  
Terminally Ill ◽  
Great Promise ◽  
Physician Assisted Suicide ◽  
On Demand ◽  
Premature Deaths ◽  
Dying Patients

With breathtalung speed, traditional criminal prohibitions against assisted suicide have been declared unconstitutional in twelve states, including California and New York. This poses great promise and great peril. The promise is that competent terminally ill patients, as a compassionate measure of last resort, will have the option of putting an end to their suffering by physician-assisted suicide (PAS). More sigmficant, legally permitting this controversial option may be a catalyst for doctors, health care institutions, and society to improve the care of the dying. PAS should be limited only to those relatively few competent patients who continue to suffer intolerably despite unrestrained efforts to palliate and who face a continued existence that they regard as worse than death. When dying patients know they will not be abandoned to miserable and pointless suffering if palliative care fails, they will be fortified to cope better with the process of dying.The immediate peril is that PAS will become a quick fix, available on demand to any patient diagnosed as terminally ill, thus bypassing palliative care and producing premature deaths.

scholarly journals Are the Distinctions Drawn in the Debate about End-of-Life Decision Making “Principled”? If Not, How Much Does it Matter?

2012 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. 66-84 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yale Kamisar
Keyword(s):  
End Of Life ◽  
Assisted Suicide ◽  
Good Death ◽  
Physician Assisted Suicide ◽  
Death With Dignity ◽  
Assisted Death ◽  
Dying Patients ◽  
Aid In Dying ◽  
End Of Life Decision ◽  
Life Decision

I sometimes wonder whether some proponents of physician-assisted suicide (PAS) or physician-assisted death (PAD) think they own the copyright to such catchy phrases as “death with dignity” and “a good death” so that if you are against PAS or PAD, then you must be against a dignified death or a good death. If one removes the quotation marks around phrases like “aid-in-dying” or “compassionate care for the dying,” I am not opposed to such end-of-life care either. Indeed, how could anybody be against this type of care?I do not want to abandon dying patients anymore than Dr. Timothy Quill does. Although, unfortunately, it will not always be easy to achieve the desired result, I agree with him that it ought to be a goal of medicine “to help people die well, to help them receive a good death” — or at least “the best possible” death under the circumstances. I part company with Professor Quill, however, when he urges us to change the law in the majority of our states so that in some circumstances patients may achieve a “good death” or a “dignified” one by means of lethal drugs.

End-of-life issues in intensive care units: a national random survey of nurses' knowledge and beliefs

2001 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 216-229 ◽  
Author(s):  
KA Puntillo ◽  
P Benner ◽  
T Drought ◽  
B Drew ◽  
N Stotts ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care ◽  
Pain Management ◽  
End Of Life ◽  
Intensive Care Units ◽  
Assisted Suicide ◽  
Life Support ◽  
Voluntary Euthanasia ◽  
Knowledge And Beliefs ◽  
Dying Patients ◽  
Almost All

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the knowledge, beliefs, and ethical concerns of nurses caring for patients dying in intensive care units. METHODS: A survey was mailed to 3000 members of the American Association of Critical-Care Nurses. The survey contained various scenarios depicting end-of-life actions for patients: pain management, withholding or withdrawing life support, assisted suicide, and voluntary and nonvoluntary euthanasia. RESULTS: Most of the respondents (N = 906) correctly identified the distinctions among the end-of-life actions depicted in the scenarios. Almost all (99%-100%) agreed with the actions of pain management and withholding or withdrawing life support. A total of 83% disagreed with assisted suicide, 95% disagreed with voluntary euthanasia, and 89% to 98% disagreed with nonvoluntary euthanasia. Most (78%) thought that dying patients frequently (31%) or sometimes (47%) received inadequate pain medicine, and almost all agreed with the double-effect principle. Communication between nurses and physicians was generally effective, but unit-level conferences that focused on grief counseling and debriefing staff rarely (38%) or never (49%) occurred. Among the respondents, 37% had been asked to assist in hastening a patient's death. Although 59% reported that they seldom acted against their consciences in caring for dying patients, 34% indicated that they sometimes had acted against their conscience, and 6% had done so to a great extent. CONCLUSIONS: Intensive care unit nurses strongly support good pain management for dying patients and withholding or withdrawing life-sustaining therapies to allow unavoidable death. The vast majority oppose assisted suicide and euthanasia. Wider professional and public dialogue on end-of-life care in intensive care units is warranted.

To die, to sleep, perchance to dream? A response to DeMichelis, Shaul and Rapoport

2019 ◽  
Vol 45 (12) ◽  
pp. 832-834 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joel L Gamble ◽  
Nathan K Gamble ◽  
Michal Pruski
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Medical Ethics ◽  
End Of Life ◽  
Assisted Suicide ◽  
Palliative Sedation ◽  
Physician Assisted Suicide ◽  
Medical Assistance ◽  
End Of Life Decisions ◽  
Medical Assistance In Dying ◽  
Life Decisions

In developing their policy on paediatric medical assistance in dying (MAID), DeMichelis, Shaul and Rapoport decide to treat euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide as ethically and practically equivalent to other end-of-life interventions, particularly palliative sedation and withdrawal of care (WOC). We highlight several flaws in the authors’ reasoning. Their argument depends on too cursory a dismissal of intention, which remains fundamental to medical ethics and law. Furthermore, they have not fairly presented the ethical analyses justifying other end-of-life decisions, analyses and decisions that were generally accepted long before MAID was legal or considered ethical. Forgetting or misunderstanding the analyses would naturally lead one to think MAID and other end-of-life decisions are morally equivalent. Yet as we recall these well-developed analyses, it becomes clear that approving of some forms of sedation and WOC does not commit one to MAID. Paediatric patients and their families can rationally and coherently reject MAID while choosing palliative care and WOC. Finally, the authors do not substantiate their claim that MAID is like palliative care in that it alleviates suffering. It is thus unreasonable to use this supposition as a warrant for their proposed policy.

scholarly journals Requests for euthanasia and assisted suicide: A qualitative study of the wordings of requests from patients at the end of life hospitalised in palliative care units.

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Florence Mathieu-Nicot ◽  
Aline Chassagne ◽  
Daniele Leboul ◽  
Anne Bousquet ◽  
Aurélie Godard-Marceau ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Qualitative Study ◽  
End Of Life ◽  
Assisted Suicide ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Physician Assisted Suicide ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Initial Request ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
Palliative Care Units

Abstract Background Whilst euthanasia and assisted suicide are forbidden by French Law, patients at the end of life, hospitalized in Palliative Care Units, sometimes express the Wish to Hasten their Death. Few Studies have analyzed the formulation of these patient requests in interviews and the associated death-related representations. The DESA study analyzed the expression of patients’ requests, focusing on the terms and how patients worded their wishes. The aim is to identify from the “raw wording” of the patients’ requests, the means of expressing them in all its singularity and evolution. Methods This is a qualitative study that took place in 11 French Palliative care Units during on year and included adult patients who had made an explicit request (euthanasia or physician assisted suicide) to a health care provider. Semi-structured interviews were conducted within 48 hours of the initial request (D0), then a week later (D7). Results At DO, the initial request is a request for euthanasia and it calls a third person urgently. This request is related to physical and psychological suffering, trauma and representations of death. At D7, we observe a semantic change; the request is less explicit and requires less intervention by a third party. The quest remains that of a death without suffering. Conclusions These patients express themselves easily on their request and listening is necessary to be able to hear the meaning of the words but also their functions. It is their nuance, variety and evolution that help to understand what the requirements mean. Trial registration number : ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02845817

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document