JAMA : the journal of the American Medical Association
-
The American College of Physicians-American Society of Internal Medicine (ACP-ASIM) End-of-Life Care Consensus Panel was convened in 1997 to identify clinical, ethical, and policy problems in end-of-life care, to analyze critically the available evidence and guidelines, and to offer consensus recommendations on how to improve care of the dying. Topic selection and content presentation were carefully debated to maximize the project's focus on providing practical clinical and other guidance to clinicians who are not specialists in palliative care. This statement examines current legal myths, realities, and grains of truth in end-of-life care. ⋯ Legal myths about end-of-life care can undermine good care and ethical medical practice. In addition, at times ethics, clinical judgment, and the law conflict. Patients (or families) and physicians can find themselves considering clinical actions that are ethically appropriate, but raise legal concerns. The 7 major legal myths regarding end-of-life care are: (1) forgoing life-sustaining treatment for patients without decision-making capacity requires evidence that this was the patient's actual wish; (2) withholding or withdrawing of artificial fluids and nutrition from terminally ill or permanently unconscious patients is illegal; (3) risk management personnel must be consulted before life-sustaining medical treatment may be terminated; (4) advance directives must comply with specific forms, are not transferable between states, and govern all future treatment decisions; oral advance directives are unenforceable; (5) if a physician prescribes or administers high doses of medication to relieve pain or other discomfort in a terminally ill patient, resulting in death, he/she will be criminally prosecuted; (6) when a terminally ill patient's suffering is overwhelming despite palliative care, and he/she requests a hastened death, there are no legally permissible options to ease suffering; and (7) the 1997 Supreme Court decisions outlawed physician-assisted suicide. Many legal barriers to end-of-life care are more mythical than real, but sometimes there is a grain of truth. Physicians must know the law of the state in which they practice. JAMA. 2000;284:2495-2501.
-
Multicenter Study Comparative Study
Neonatal end-of-life decision making: Physicians' attitudes and relationship with self-reported practices in 10 European countries.
The ethical issues surrounding end-of-life decision making for infants with adverse prognoses are controversial. Little empirical evidence is available on the attitudes and values that underlie such decisions in different countries and cultures. ⋯ In our study, physicians' likelihood of reporting setting limits to intensive neonatal interventions in cases of poor neurological prognosis is related to their attitudes. After adjusting for potential confounders, country remained the most important predictor of physicians' attitudes and practices. JAMA. 2000;284:2451-2459.
-
A clear understanding of what patients, families, and health care practitioners view as important at the end of life is integral to the success of improving care of dying patients. Empirical evidence defining such factors, however, is lacking. ⋯ Although pain and symptom management, communication with one's physician, preparation for death, and the opportunity to achieve a sense of completion are important to most, other factors important to quality at the end of life differ by role and by individual. Efforts to evaluate and improve patients' and families' experiences at the end of life must account for diverse perceptions of quality. JAMA. 2000;284:2476-2482.
-
Discussions about end-of-life issues are difficult for clinicians to initiate. Patients, their families, and clinicians frequently collude to avoid mentioning death or dying, even when the patient's suffering is severe and prognosis is poor. In addition to determining from observational research when and where communication problems exist, much can be learned from in-depth discussions with patients, family members, and physicians who are facing these issues together. ⋯ Studies from the medical literature, the patient's and physician's particular experience together, and the author's clinical experience provide practical insights into how to address these issues. Initiating end-of-life discussions earlier and more systematically could allow patients to make more informed choices, achieve better palliation of symptoms, and have more opportunity to work on issues of life closure. JAMA. 2000;284:2502-2507.