Results From a Survey of American Geriatrics Society Members' Views on Physician-Assisted Suicide.
end-of-life care
palliative care
physician aid in dying
physician-assisted death
physician-assisted suicide
Journal
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
ISSN: 1532-5415
Titre abrégé: J Am Geriatr Soc
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7503062
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 2020
01 2020
Historique:
received:
01
10
2019
accepted:
06
10
2019
pubmed:
4
12
2019
medline:
15
8
2020
entrez:
3
12
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Physician-assisted suicide (PAS) is a controversial practice, currently legal in nine states and the District of Columbia. No prior study explores the views of the American Geriatrics Society (AGS) membership on PAS. We surveyed 1488 randomly selected AGS members via email. A total of 369 AGS members completed the survey (24.8% response rate). We conducted bivariate correlation analyses of beliefs related to support for PAS. We also conducted qualitative analysis of open-ended responses. There was no consensus regarding the acceptability of PAS, with 47% supporting and 52% opposing this practice. PAS being legal in the respondent's state, belief that respect for autonomy alone is sufficient to justify PAS, and intent to prescribe or support requests for PAS if legal in state of practice all correlated with support for PAS. There was no consensus on whether the AGS should oppose, support, or adopt a neutral stance on PAS. Most respondents believed that PAS is more complex among patients with low health literacy, low English proficiency, disability, dependency, or frailty. Most respondents supported mandatory palliative care consultation and independent assessments from two physicians. Themes identified from qualitative analysis include role of the medical profession, uncertainty of the role of professional organizations, potential unintended consequences, autonomy, and ethical and moral considerations. There was no consensus among respondents regarding the acceptability of PAS. Respondents expressed concern about vulnerable older populations and the need for safeguards when responding to requests for PAS. Ethical, legal, and policy discussions regarding PAS should consider vulnerable populations. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:23-30, 2019.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Physician-assisted suicide (PAS) is a controversial practice, currently legal in nine states and the District of Columbia. No prior study explores the views of the American Geriatrics Society (AGS) membership on PAS.
DESIGN
We surveyed 1488 randomly selected AGS members via email.
PARTICIPANTS
A total of 369 AGS members completed the survey (24.8% response rate).
ANALYSIS
We conducted bivariate correlation analyses of beliefs related to support for PAS. We also conducted qualitative analysis of open-ended responses.
RESULTS
There was no consensus regarding the acceptability of PAS, with 47% supporting and 52% opposing this practice. PAS being legal in the respondent's state, belief that respect for autonomy alone is sufficient to justify PAS, and intent to prescribe or support requests for PAS if legal in state of practice all correlated with support for PAS. There was no consensus on whether the AGS should oppose, support, or adopt a neutral stance on PAS. Most respondents believed that PAS is more complex among patients with low health literacy, low English proficiency, disability, dependency, or frailty. Most respondents supported mandatory palliative care consultation and independent assessments from two physicians. Themes identified from qualitative analysis include role of the medical profession, uncertainty of the role of professional organizations, potential unintended consequences, autonomy, and ethical and moral considerations.
CONCLUSION
There was no consensus among respondents regarding the acceptability of PAS. Respondents expressed concern about vulnerable older populations and the need for safeguards when responding to requests for PAS. Ethical, legal, and policy discussions regarding PAS should consider vulnerable populations. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:23-30, 2019.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
23-30Subventions
Organisme : NIA NIH HHS
ID : P30 AG059307
Pays : United States
Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
© 2019 The American Geriatrics Society.
Références
Institute of Medicine Committee on Approaching Death Dying in America. Improving Quality and Honoring Individual Preferences Near the End of Life. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2015.
Emanuel EJ, Onwuteaka-Philipsen BD, Urwin JW, Cohen J. Attitudes and practices of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide in the United States, Canada, and Europe. JAMA. 2016;316(1):79-90.
Majority of Americans Remain Supportive of Euthanasia. Politics 2017. Gallup (online). http://news.gallup.com/poll/211928/majority-americans-remain-supportive-euthanasia.aspx?g_source=MORAL_ISSUES&g_medium=topic&g_campaign=tiles. Accessed September 16, 2019.
Winfield Cunningham P. The Health 202: Legalizing Assisted Suicide Has Stalled at Every Level. Washington Post (online), October 24, 2017. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/the-health-202/2017/10/24/the-health-202-legalizing-assisted-suicide-has-stalled-at-every-level/59ee109330fb045cba000973/?utm_term=.fb0dff213bb9. Accessed September 16, 2019.
Death With Dignity Around the U.S. https://www.deathwithdignity.org/take-action/. Updated September 16, 2019. Accessed September 16, 2019.
Romine T. CNN (online). April 15, 2019. New Jersey Will Now Allow Terminally Ill Patients to End Their Lives. https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/15/health/nj-assisted-suicide-terminally-ill-law-trnd/index.html. Accessed September 16, 2019.
Villeneuve M. Maine Becomes 8th State to Legalize Assisted Suicide. June 12, 2019. https://www.apnews.com/7f0fe9d789294a02852c1669c892f382. Accessed September 16, 2019.
Physician Assisted Death. Bioethics Briefings. The Hastings Center (online). https://www.thehastingscenter.org/briefingbook/physician-assisted-death. Accessed September 16, 2019.
Watts DT, Howell T. Assisted suicide is not voluntary active euthanasia. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1992;40:1043-1046.
SurveyMonkey Inc. 2016. San Mateo, CA. http://www.surveymonkey.com. Accessed March 23, 2016.
IBM Corp. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 22.0. IBM Corp: Armonk, NY; 2013.
Patton MQ. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2002.
ATLAS.ti Software for a Mac Computer, Version 8.1.3. Berlin, Germany: Scientific Software Development; 2018.
Allison PD. Missing Data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing; 2001.
Sulmasy DP, Finlay I, Fitzgerald F, Foley K, Payne R, Siegler M. Physician-assisted suicide: why neutrality by organized medicine is neither neutral nor appropriate. J Gen Intern Med. 2018;33(18):1394-1399.
Zenz J, Tryba M, Zenz M. Palliative care professionals' willingness to perform euthanasia or physician assisted suicide. BMC Palliat Care. 2015;14(60):60.
Quill TE, Cassel CK. Professional organizations' position statements on physician-assisted suicide: a case for studied neutrality. Ann Intern Med. 2003;138(3):208-211.
Beauchamp TL, Childress JF. Principles of Biomedical Ethics. 5th ed. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2001.
Burns KEA, Duffett M, Kho ME, et al. A guide for the design and conduct of self-administrated surveys of clinicians. CMAJ. 2008;179(3):245-252.
Braithwaite D, Emery J, DeLusignan S, et al. Using the internet to conduct surveys of health professionals: a valid alternative? Fam Practice. 2003;20(5):545-551.
Cunningham CT, Quan H, Hemmelgarn B, et al. Exploring physician specialist response rates to web-based surveys. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2015;15:32.