Assisted dying: the ongoing debate

Regulating Death: A Brief History of Medical Assistance in Dying

Unique reports of suicide and euthanasia date back more than 2 millennia, reflecting evolving philosophies of death and dying as expressions of the mores dominating a given era. One longstanding theme in the history of decisions to die has been staunch opposition founded in religious claims that one’s body is a trust from the divine (and therefore not wholly in their ownership). The role of the physician has also been traditionally estranged from participation in such decisions, dating back to rudimentary conceptions of medical ethics in the Hippocratic notion primum non nocere (‘first, do no harm’). However, fundamental principles in the modern philosophy of medicine lend support to the idea that physicians can be justified in actions which cause some harm, in so far as they are acting to fulfil a greater ethical imperative. This brief historical review explores the inception of modern North American medical assistance in dying (MAiD) policy through a series of critical case studies in the unfolding of its practice. Medically assisted dying has presently been legalised in Canada and some United States jurisdictions, but with critical caveats surrounding circumstances of mature minors, advance directives and mental illness as participants’ sole underlying medical condition. While the modern regulations surrounding MAiD continue to take shape, the palliative care community is well-positioned to both guide and scrutinise the ethics of this practice.

Investigating palliative care nurse attitudes towards medical assistance in dying: An exploratory cross-sectional study

AIM

To investigate palliative care nurse attitudes towards medical assistance in dying.

DESIGN

An exploratory cross-sectional study design.

METHODS

A mailed letter recruited participants with data collection occurring on a secure online survey platform between November 2017-February 2018. Data analyses included descriptive and bivariate statistics and stepwise linear regression.

RESULTS

Palliative care nurse attitudes towards medical assistance in dying were explained by perceived expertise in the social domain of palliative care, personal importance of religion/faith, professional importance of religion/faith, and nursing designation.

CONCLUSION

This study reveals the perceived importance of religion, versus religious affiliation alone, as significant in influencing provider attitudes towards assisted dying. Further research is needed to understand differences in attitudes between Registered Nurses and Registered Practical Nurses and how the social domain of palliative care influences nurse attitude.

IMPACT

Organizations must prioritize nursing input, encourage open interprofessional dialogue and provide support for ethical decision-making, practice decisions, and conscientious objection surrounding medical assistance in dying. Longitudinal nursing studies are needed to understand the impact of legislation on quality and person-centred end-of-life care and the emotional well-being/retention of palliative care nurses.

Euthanasia and assisted dying: what is the current position and what are the key arguments informing the debate?

Assisted dying is a highly controversial moral issue incorporating both physician-assisted dying (PAD) and voluntary active euthanasia. End-of-life practices are debated in many countries, with assisted dying receiving different consideration across various jurisdictions. In this paper, we provide an analytic framework of the current position and the main arguments related to the rights and moral principles concerning assisted dying. Assisted dying proponents focus on the respect of autonomy, self-determination and forestalling suffering. On the other hand, concerns are raised regarding the interpretation of the constitutional right to life and balancing this with the premise of assisted dying, alongside the impacts of assisted dying on the doctor-patient relationship, which is fundamentally based on trust, mutual respect and the premise of 'first do no harm'. Our review is underpinning the interpretation of constitutional rights and the Hippocratic Oath with the premise of assisted dying, alongside the impacts of assisted dying on the doctor-patient relationship. Most clinicians remain untrained in such decision making, with fears against crossing key ethical divides. Due to the increasing number of cases of assisted dying and lack of consensus, our review enables the integration of ethical and legal aspects and facilitates decision making.

Should assisted dying be legalised?

When an individual facing intractable pain is given an estimate of a few months to live, does hastening death become a viable and legitimate alternative for willing patients? Has the time come for physicians to do away with the traditional notion of healthcare as maintaining or improving physical and mental health, and instead accept their own limitations by facilitating death when requested? The Universities of Oxford and Cambridge held the 2013 Varsity Medical Debate on the motion "This House Would Legalise Assisted Dying". This article summarises the key arguments developed over the course of the debate. We will explore how assisted dying can affect both the patient and doctor; the nature of consent and limits of autonomy; the effects on society; the viability of a proposed model; and, perhaps most importantly, the potential need for the practice within our current medico-legal framework.

Symptoms, unbearability and the nature of suffering in terminal cancer patients dying at home: a prospective primary care study

BACKGROUND

Primary care physicians provide palliative home care. In cancer patients dying at home in the Netherlands (45% of all cancer patients) euthanasia in about one out of every seven patients indicates unbearable suffering. Symptom prevalence, relationship between intensity of symptoms and unbearable suffering, evolvement of symptoms and unbearability over time and quality of unbearable suffering were studied in end-of-life cancer patients in primary care.

METHODS

44 general practitioners during three years recruited cancer patients estimated to die within six months. Every two months patients quantified intensity as well as unbearability of 69 symptoms with the State-of-Suffering-V (SOS-V). Also overall unbearable suffering was quantified. The five-point rating scale ranged from 1 (not at all) to 5 (hardly can be worse). For symptoms assessed to be unbearable the nature of the suffering was additionally investigated with open-ended questions. The final interviews were analyzed; for longitudinal evolvement also the pre-final interviews were analyzed. Symptom intensity scores 4 and 5 were defined to indicate high intensity. Symptom unbearability scores 4 and 5 were defined to indicate unbearable suffering. Two raters categorized the qualitative descriptions of unbearable suffering.

RESULTS

Out of 148 requested patients 51% participated; 64 patients were followed up until death. The SOS-V was administered at least once in 60 patients (on average 30 days before death) and at least twice in 33 patients. Weakness was the most frequent unbearable symptom (57%). Pain was unbearable in 25%. Pain, loss of control over one's life and fear of future suffering frequently were unbearable (89-92%) when symptom intensity was high. Loss of control over one's life, vomiting and not being able to do important things frequently were unbearable (52-80%) when symptom intensity was low. Unbearable weakness significantly increased between pre-final and final interview. Physical suffering, loss of meaning, loss of autonomy, experiencing to be a burden, fear of future suffering and worrying more frequently occurred in patients suffering unbearably overall.

CONCLUSIONS

Weakness was the most prevalent unbearable symptom in an end-of-life primary care cancer population. Physical suffering, loss of meaning and loss of autonomy more frequently occurred in patients who suffered unbearably overall.

Pereira's attack on legalizing euthanasia or assisted suicide: smoke and mirrors

OBJECTIVE

To review the empirical claims made in: Pereira J. Legalizing euthanasia or assisted suicide: the illusion of safeguards and controls. Curr Oncol 2011;18:e38-45.

DESIGN

We collected all of the empirical claims made by Jose Pereira in "Legalizing euthanasia or assisted suicide: the illusion of safeguards and controls." We then collected all reference sources provided for those claims. We compared the claims with the sources (where sources were provided) and evaluated the level of support, if any, the sources provide for the claims. We also reviewed other available literature to assess the veracity of the empirical claims made in the paper. We then wrote the present paper using examples from the review.

RESULTS

Pereira makes a number of factual statements without providing any sources. Pereira also makes a number of factual statements with sources, where the sources do not, in fact, provide support for the statements he made. Pereira also makes a number of false statements about the law and practice in jurisdictions that have legalized euthanasia or assisted suicide.

CONCLUSIONS

Pereira's conclusions are not supported by the evidence he provided. His paper should not be given any credence in the public policy debate about the legal status of assisted suicide and euthanasia in Canada and around the world.