Search

ObjectivesPalliative sedation for existential suffering (PS-ES) is considered a controversial practice to control refractory suffering at the end of life. This study aims to explore Belgian palliative care physicians’ perceptions regarding the ethics of PS-ES.MethodsThis nationwide qualitative study follows a Grounded Theory approach. We conducted semistructured interviews with 25 palliative care physicians working in 23 Belgian hospitals and hospices (Flanders, Brussels, Wallonia). We analysed the data using the Qualitative Analysis Guide Of Leuven and we followed the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research guidelines.ResultsThe data revealed that Belgian palliative care physicians have difficulty characterising ES and distinguishing it from other types of suffering. They express mixed attitudes towards PS-ES and employ a wide range of ethical arguments in favour and against it, which are mainly linked to the four principles of biomedical ethics.ConclusionSince there is a lack of consensus among Belgian palliative care physicians about PS-ES, further research is needed to clarify their attitudes. A better understanding of physicians’ underlying presuppositions can provide more insight into their perceptions of ES and PS-ES and provide further insight for establishing good practices in ES management at the end of life.

This article opens by reviewing the state of the knowledge on the most current worldwide facts about suicide in older people. Next, a number of values that have a role in this problem are considered. Having a clear and current understanding of suicide and of the related self-held and social values forms the framework for a number of clinical-ethical recommendations for care practice. An important aspect of caring for older people with suicidal tendencies is to determine whether their primary care fosters self-esteem and affirms their dignity. In addition to providing a timely and appropriate diagnosis and treatment of suicidality, the caregiver is responsible for helping the patient to cope with stressful conditions, and for treating the patient with respect and consideration, thereby supporting the patient's dignity and giving the patient a reason to live. Paying attention to these central points will foster caring contact with suicidal older people.

In current Western societies, increasing numbers of people express their desire to choose when to die. Allowing people to choose the moment of their death is an ethical issue that should be embedded in sound clinical and legal frameworks. In the case of persons with dementia, it raises further ethical questions such as: Does the person have the capacity to make the choice? Is the person being coerced? Who should be involved in the decision? Is the person’s suffering untreatable? The use of Advance Euthanasia Directives (AED) is suggested as a way to deal with end-of-life wishes of persons with dementia. However, in the Netherlands—the only country in which this practice is legal—the experiences of patients, doctors, and relatives have been far from satisfactory.Our paper analyses this complex ethical challenge from a Dignity-Enhancing Care approach, starting from the Dutch experiences with AED as a case. We first consider the lived experiences of the different stakeholders, seeking out a dialogical-interpretative understanding of care. We aim to promote human dignity as a normative standard for end-of-life care practices. Three concrete proposals are then presented in which this approach can be operationalised in order to deal respectfully with the end-of-life choices of persons with dementia.

Although advance care planning (ACP) is highly relevant for nursing home residents, its uptake in nursing homes is low. To meet the need for context-specific ACP tools to support nursing home staff in conducting ACP conversations, we developed the ACP+intervention. At its core, we designed three ACP tools to aid care staff in discussing and documenting nursing home resident’s wishes and preferences for future treatment and care: (1) an extensive ACP conversation guide, (2) a one-page conversation tool and (3) an ACP document to record outcomes of conversations. These nursing home-specific ACP tools aim to avoid a purely document-driven or ‘tick-box’ approach to the ACP process and to involve residents, including those living with dementia according to their capacity, their families and healthcare professionals.

Intensive care unit health care professionals must be skilled in providing end-of-life care. Crucial in this kind of care is end-of-life decision-making, which is a complex process involving a variety of stakeholders and requiring adequate justification. The aim of this systematic review is to analyse papers tackling ethical issues in relation to end-of-life decision-making in intensive care units. It explores the ethical positions, arguments and principles.

BackgroundPalliative sedation for existential suffering (PS-ES) is a controversial clinical intervention. Empirical studies about physicians’ perceptions do not converge in a clear position and current clinical practice guidelines do not agree either regarding this kind of intervention.AimTo gain deeper insight into physicians’ perceptions of PS-ES, the factors influencing it, the conditions for implementing it and the alternatives to it.DesignSystematic review of qualitative, quantitative and mixed-methods studies following the Peer Review Electronic Search Strategiesand Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysesprotocols; quality appraisal and thematic synthesis methodology.Data sourcesSeven electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES) were exhaustively searched from inception through March 2019. Two reviewers screened paper titles, abstracts and full texts. We included only peer-reviewed journal articles published in English, French, German, Dutch, Spanish, Italian or Portuguese that focused on physicians’ perceptions of PS-ES.ResultsThe search yielded 17 publications published between 2002 and 2017. Physicians do not hold clear views or agree if and when PS-ES is appropriate. Case-related and individual-related factors that influenced physicians’ perceptions were identified. There is still no consensus regarding criteria to distinguish between necessary and sufficient conditions for invoking PS-ES. Some alternatives to PS-ES were identified.ConclusionsTo date, there is still no consensus on physicians’ perceptions of PS-ES. Further research is necessary to understand factors that influence physicians’ perceptions and philosophical-ethical presuppositions underlying this perceptions.

Different embodiments of technology permeate all layers of public and private domains in society. In the public domain of aged care, attention is increasingly focused on the use of socially assistive robots (SARs) supporting caregivers and older adults to guarantee that older adults receive care. The introduction of SARs in aged-care contexts is joint by intensive empirical and philosophical research. Although these efforts merit praise, current empirical and philosophical research are still too far separated. Strengthening the connection between these two fields is crucial to have a full understanding of the ethical impact of these technological artefacts. To bridge this gap, we propose a philosophical-ethical framework for SAR use, one that is grounded in the dialogue between empirical-ethical knowledge about and philosophical-ethical reflection on SAR use. We highlight the importance of considering the intuitions of older adults and their caregivers in this framework. Grounding philosophical-ethical reflection in these intuitions opens the ethics of SAR use in aged care to its own socio-historical contextualisation. Referring to the work of Margaret Urban Walker, Joan Tronto and Andrew Feenberg, it is argued that this socio-historical contextualisation of the ethics of SAR use already has strong philosophical underpinnings. Moreover, this contextualisation enables us to formulate a rudimentary decision-making process about SAR use in aged care which rests on three pillars: (1) stakeholders’ intuitions about SAR use as sources of knowledge; (2) interpretative dialogues as democratic spaces to discuss the ethics of SAR use; (3) the concretisation of ethics in SAR use.

A study is conducted to validate the confusion assessment method used by bedside nurses, to detect delirium.

Euthanasia decision making is a complex process for physicians and nurses that involves clinical, legal, ethical, and personal-emotional aspects. In this respect, attention has been given to hospitals' written ethics policies on euthanasia. The aim of our study was to explore the impact of a written ethics policy on euthanasia, as experienced by physicians and nurses involved in euthanasia care processes. A qualitative multiple case study in three selected general hospitals was conducted. Grounded theory methodology was used to guide data collection and analysis. The purposive sample resulted in 23 in-depth interviews with physicians (n = 11) and nurses (n = 12). The euthanasia policy gave the care providers a sense of being supported throughout the euthanasia care process. While care providers mainly feel the influence of a euthanasia policy on practical and professional levels of providing care, the influence of a policy on the providers' ethical reflection and practice is less clear. The study raises questions about the meaning of a written ethics policy for the ethical practice of physicians and nurses, when they have to deal with ethically sensitive issues such as euthanasia.

This study explored nurses’ involvement in the care process for mentally competent, terminally ill patients requesting euthanasia in general hospitals in Flanders, Belgium. In-depth interviews with 18 nurses who had experience in caring for patients requesting euthanasia since May 2002 were analyzed using grounded theory qualitative methods. We found that the involvement of nurses in the care process is influenced by their predominant perspective on it: the procedural, action-focused perspective, from which good practical organization of the care process is essential; or the existential-interpretative perspective, from which it is important to understand the patient's request within a dialogue-focused and communicational atmosphere. Findings show that the two perspectives are not mutually exclusive, but rather complementary dimensions of the euthanasia care process. Hence, sufficient support for nurses to reach a well-balanced integration of both perspectives is essential.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the possibilities and limitations of an ethical and practical approach to terminal dehydration. We have argued that dehydration among terminally ill patients offers an important key to a better understanding of the dying process, and that the caregivers' reactions can lead to a deepening of holistic palliative care.This article makes clear that the moral question of terminal dehydration can only be treated by an interdisciplinary approach. Therefore, before studying the question of the most humane course possible, we must first understand the meaning of dehydration and its repercussions for the dying patient.Inspired by an attitude of respect for a good dying process, we have suggested that it is possible to put forward as a general guideline that medical therapy should be progressively reduced when it has been determined that a patient has reached the terminal stage, or is in an irreversible deteriorating process. We describe the critical somatic, social, psychological, moral and spiritual points, which make up an ethical approach to terminal dehydration (TD). In the total care of the irreversibly terminally ill patient, tolerating TD can be an expression of an authentic and caring involvement in the dying patient's welfare.

ObjectiveTo present (1) the ethical concepts related to the debate on resuscitation of extremely premature infants (EPIs) as they are described in the ethical literature; and (2) the ethical arguments based on these concepts.DesignWe conducted a systematic review of the ethical literature. We selected articles based on the following predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria: (1) English language articles (2) presenting fully elaborated ethical arguments (3) on resuscitation (4) of EPIs, that is, infants born before 28 weeks of gestation.AnalysisAfter repeated reading of articles, we developed individual summaries, conceptual schemes and an overall conceptual scheme. Ethical arguments and concepts were identified and analysed.ResultsForty articles were included out of 4709 screened. Personhood, best interest, autonomy and justice were concepts grounding the various arguments. Regarding these concepts, included authors agreed that the best interest principle should guide resuscitation decisions, whereas justice seemed the least important concept. The arguments addressed two questions: Should we resuscitate EPIs? Who should decide? Included authors agreed that not all EPIs should be resuscitated but disagreed on what criteria should ground this decision. Overall, included authors agreed that both parents and physicians should contribute to the decision.ConclusionsThe included publications suggest that while the best interest is the main concept guiding resuscitation decisions, justice is the least important. The included authors also agree that both parents and physicians should be actively involved in resuscitation decisions for EPIs. However, our results suggest that parents’ decision should be over-ridden when in contrast with the EPI’s best interest.