Search

How do people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (PALS) deal with their diagnosis and engage in end-of-life decision-making? What informational or supportive needs do they have for counselling about life-sustaining treatment and end-of-life care? Which correlating conditions and influences relate to these needs and how do they connect to the wish to die or wish to live? We conducted a qualitative interview study with 13 people with ALS in Germany from March 2019 to April 2021. Data collection and analysis followed a grounded theory-based approach and revealed close relationships between coping, informational needs and the preparedness for decision-making. We identified the coping strategies 'avoid thinking about end-of-life' and its counterpart, 'planning ahead to be well-prepared,' and differentiated the latter into the patterns 'withdrawing from life and taking precautions against life-prolongation' and 'searching for a new meaning in life and preparing for life-sustaining treatment'. The approaches are based on individual perceptions, attitudes and motives and can be positively/negatively reinforced by healthcare professionals (HCP), family and other interpersonal networks, but also by disease progression and in reaction to health care services. Type and degree of needs concerning information and counselling differed according to coping strategies. These strategies may vary over time, resulting in different support needs. Our findings signify that deep insight is needed into PALS' coping processes to understand their decision-making about life-sustaining treatment. Healthcare professionals should be sensitive to illness experiences beyond medical aspects and foster coping as a biographical process to better support people with ALS., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Spoden et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Standard views of good death in human and veterinary medicine considerably differ from one another. Whereas the good death ideal in palliative medicine emphasizes the positive aspects of non-induced dying, veterinarians typically promote a quick and painless killing with the aim to end suffering. Recent developments suggest a convergence of both professions and professional attitudes, however. Palliative physicians are confronted with patients wishing to be 'put to sleep', while veterinarians have begun to integrate principles and practices from hospice care. We will argue that the discourses on good human and animal deaths are not distinct, but that they interact and influence each other. On the one hand, veterinary medicine adapts techniques like chemotherapy or sedation from palliative end-of-life care. On the other hand, philosophers, veterinarians, pet owners, patients and the general public alike make certain assumptions about the (dis)analogy of human and animal dying or killing. Unfortunately, these interactions have only scarcely been reflected normatively, especially on the part of human medicine. Conflicts and misattributions with potential serious negative consequences for the (animal and human) patients' wellbeing are provoked. For these reasons, palliative physicians and veterinarians are invited to engage in the debate around human and animal end-of-life care., (© 2021. The Author(s).)