La sédation continue jusqu’à la mort. Une voie française pour les soins de fin de vie ?

Intentions at the End of Life: Continuous Deep Sedation and France's Claeys-Leonetti law

In 2016, France passed a major law that is unique in giving terminally ill and suffering patients the right to the controversial procedure of continuous deep sedation until death (CDS). In so doing, the law identifies CDS as a sui generis clinical practice, distinct from other forms of palliative sedation therapy, as well as from euthanasia. As such, it reconfigures the ethical debate over CDS in interesting ways. This paper addresses one aspect of this reconfiguration and its implications for the intentions at work in this complex time at the end of life. The concept of intention is often considered central to the ethics of end-of-life care, but its role is recognized to be problematic, with charges of elusiveness and ambiguity. I aim to show that consideration of the French law affords a new understanding of the intentionality of CDS, and that in addition to the obvious importance of this for clarifying the ethics of the practice, it may suggest new ways of addressing the wider problem of ambiguous clinical intentions at end of life.

Refractory psycho-existential distress and continuous deep sedation until death in palliative care: The French perspective

OBJECTIVE

Since February 2016, French Claeys-Leonetti law has recognized patients' right to confront incurable diseases with short-term prognosis and refractory physical or psychological or existential symptoms by requesting continuous deep sedation until death (CDSUD). Determining when psychological or existential distress is refractory and unbearable remains complex and controversial.This review provides a comprehensive thought on CDSUD for advanced incurable patients with refractory psychological and/or existential distress in palliative care settings. It offers guidance on psychiatric or psychological diagnosis for explaining patients' requests for CDSUD.

METHOD

A narrative literature review (2000-2019) was conducted on the MedLine search about the use of palliative sedation in cases of refractory psychological and/or existential distress.

RESULTS

(1) Definitions of "refractory symptom," "refractory psychological distress," and "refractory existential distress" are inconsistent; (2) alternative diagnoses might obscure or be obscured by psycho-existential distress; and (3) criteria on meanings, reasons for requests, decision-making processes, and functions are evolving in practice.

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

Before implementing CDSUD, palliative healthcare professionals should seek input from psycho-oncologists in palliative care. Mental health professionals should analyze and assess the reasons for psychological and/or existential distress, consider the intentionality processes of requests, and explore alternative diagnoses, such as depressive or adjustment disorders, demoralization syndrome, desire to hasten death, and desire for euthanasia. Therapeutic responses (e.g., pharmacological and psychotherapeutic) should be implemented before deciding that psycho-existential distress is refractory.