• Claudia Bozzaro and Jan Schildmann.
• Department of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine, Albert-Ludwigs-University, Freiburg, Germany. Electronic address: bozzaro@egm.uni-freiburg.de.
• J Pain Symptom Manage. 2018 Aug 1; 56 (2): 288-294.

AbstractPalliative sedation is an increasingly used and, simultaneously, challenging practice at the end of life. Many controversies associated with this therapy are rooted in implicit differences regarding the understanding of "suffering" as a prerequisite for palliative sedation. The aim of this study is to inform the current debates by a conceptual analysis of two different philosophical accounts of suffering-1) the subjective and holistic concept and 2) the objective and gradual concept-and by a clinical-ethical analysis of the implications of each account for decisions about palliative sedation. We will show that although the subjective and holistic account of suffering fits well with the holistic approach of palliative care, there are considerable challenges to justify limits to requests for palliative sedation. By contrast, the objective and gradual account fits well with the need for an objective basis for clinical decisions in the context of palliative sedation but runs the risk of falling short when considering the individual and subjective experience of suffering at the end of life. We will conclude with a plea for the necessity of further combined conceptual and empirical research to develop a sound and feasible understanding of suffering, which can contribute to consistent decision making about palliative sedation.Copyright © 2018 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

11 keywords...

hide…