Facilitating equitable access to hospice care in socially deprived areas: A mixed methods multiple case study

"You can't die here": an exploration of the barriers to dying-in-place for structurally vulnerable populations in an urban centre in British Columbia, Canada

BACKGROUND

One measure of quality in palliative care involves ensuring people approaching the end of life are able to receive care, and ultimately die, in the places they choose. Canadian palliative care policy directives stem from this tenet of autonomy, acknowledging that most people prefer to die at home, where they feel safe and comfortable. Limited research, however, considers the lack of 'choice' people positioned as structurally vulnerable (e.g., experiencing extreme poverty, homelessness, substance-use/criminalization, etc.) have in regard to places of care and death, with the option of dying-in-place most often denied.

METHODS

Drawing from ethnographic and participatory action research data collected during two studies that took place from 2014 to 2019 in an urban centre in British Columbia, Canada, this analysis explores barriers preventing people who experience social and structural inequity the option to die-in-place. Participants include: (1) people positioned as structurally vulnerable on a palliative trajectory; (2) their informal support persons/family caregivers (e.g., street family); (3) community service providers (e.g., housing workers, medical professionals); and (4) key informants (e.g., managers, medical directors, executive directors). Data includes observational fieldnotes, focus group and interviews transcripts. Interpretive thematic analytic techniques were employed.

RESULTS

Participants on a palliative trajectory lacked access to stable, affordable, or permanent housing, yet expressed their desire to stay 'in-place' at the end of life. Analysis reveals three main barriers impeding their 'choice' to remain in-place at the end of life: (1) Misaligned perceptions of risk and safety; (2) Challenges managing pain in the context of substance use, stigma, and discrimination; and (3) Gaps between protocols, policies, and procedures for health teams.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings demonstrate how the rhetoric of 'choice' in regard to preferred place of death is ethically problematic because experienced inequities are produced and constrained by socio-structural forces that reach beyond individuals' control. Ultimately, our findings contribute suggestions for policy, programs and practice to enhance inclusiveness in palliative care. Re-defining 'home' within palliative care, enhancing supports, education, and training for community care workers, integrating palliative approaches to care into the everyday work of non-health care providers, and acknowledging, valuing, and building upon existing relations of care can help to overcome existing barriers to delivering palliative care in various settings and increase the opportunity for all to spend their end of life in the places that they prefer.

Reflecting on choices and responsibility in palliative care in the context of social disadvantage

There is a need to understand how to improve palliative care provision for people impacted by social inequity. Social inequity, such as that related to socioeconomic circumstances, has profound impacts on experiences of death and dying, posing personal and professional challenges for frontline professionals tasked to ensure that everyone receives the best standard of care at the end of their lives. Recent research has highlighted an urgent need to find ways of supporting healthcare professionals to acknowledge and unpack some of the challenges experienced when trying to deliver equitable palliative care. For example, those involved in patient or person-centred activities within health settings often feel comfortable focusing on individual choice and responsibility. This can become ethically problematic when considering that inequities experienced towards the end of life are produced and constrained by socio-structural forces beyond one individual's control. Ideas and theories originating outside palliative care, including work on structural injustice, cultural safety and capabilities approach, offer an alternative lens through which to consider roles and responsibilities for attending to inequities experienced at the end of life. This paper draws upon these ideas to offer a new way of framing individual responsibility, agency and collective action that may help palliative care professionals to support patients nearing their end of life, and their families, in the context of socioeconomic disadvantage. In this paper, we argue that, ultimately, for action on inequity in palliative care to be effective, it must be coherent with how people understand the production of, and responsibility for, those inequities, something that there is limited understanding of within palliative care.