The impact of the euthanasia assessment procedure: a qualitative interview study among adults with psychiatric conditions.


Journal

BMC psychiatry
ISSN: 1471-244X
Titre abrégé: BMC Psychiatry
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968559

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
27 06 2022
Historique:
received: 20 01 2022
accepted: 01 06 2022
entrez: 27 6 2022
pubmed: 28 6 2022
medline: 30 6 2022
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Assisted dying for adults with psychiatric conditions (APC) is highly controversial but legally possible in a few countries, including Belgium. Previous research has suggested that the complex euthanasia assessment procedure may cause additional suffering in APC but may also induce positive experiences. This study reports on the impact of the euthanasia assessment procedure as experienced by APC on three counts: 1) their mental state, including death ideation; 2) their treatment trajectory; 3) their social relationships. We performed an in-depth qualitative interview study with 16 APC in Flanders, Belgium, who had voiced a euthanasia request between 2016-2020. Thematic coding was used. We interviewed 16 APC. Euthanasia assessment procedures brought out a plethora of experiences in APC, both favourable and unfavourable. Whereas thoughts of suicide remain present to a certain extent, being in the assessment procedure allows some APC to reconsider alternatives towards life, and also to attempt new treatment options. However, many APC experience ambivalence about the supposedly inherent desirability and dignity in euthanasia. Worries also surfaced about the rationale behind and effects of involvement of APCs' social circle, and about the impact it could have on them. Further research, including other stakeholder perspectives, is recommended with a view to maximising favourable and minimising unfavourable impacts for all involved. In clinical practice attention to these impacts is paramount, and clear communication and management of expectations between physician and patient, seems appropriate to address the many ambivalent experiences that accompany APC during the euthanasia assessment procedure. Policy attention could in this regard go to clarifying certain sources of ambivalence and issues that are insufficiently addressed, such as modalities of relatives' involvement.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Assisted dying for adults with psychiatric conditions (APC) is highly controversial but legally possible in a few countries, including Belgium. Previous research has suggested that the complex euthanasia assessment procedure may cause additional suffering in APC but may also induce positive experiences. This study reports on the impact of the euthanasia assessment procedure as experienced by APC on three counts: 1) their mental state, including death ideation; 2) their treatment trajectory; 3) their social relationships.
METHODS
We performed an in-depth qualitative interview study with 16 APC in Flanders, Belgium, who had voiced a euthanasia request between 2016-2020. Thematic coding was used.
FINDINGS
We interviewed 16 APC. Euthanasia assessment procedures brought out a plethora of experiences in APC, both favourable and unfavourable. Whereas thoughts of suicide remain present to a certain extent, being in the assessment procedure allows some APC to reconsider alternatives towards life, and also to attempt new treatment options. However, many APC experience ambivalence about the supposedly inherent desirability and dignity in euthanasia. Worries also surfaced about the rationale behind and effects of involvement of APCs' social circle, and about the impact it could have on them.
CONCLUSION
Further research, including other stakeholder perspectives, is recommended with a view to maximising favourable and minimising unfavourable impacts for all involved. In clinical practice attention to these impacts is paramount, and clear communication and management of expectations between physician and patient, seems appropriate to address the many ambivalent experiences that accompany APC during the euthanasia assessment procedure. Policy attention could in this regard go to clarifying certain sources of ambivalence and issues that are insufficiently addressed, such as modalities of relatives' involvement.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35761195
doi: 10.1186/s12888-022-04039-2
pii: 10.1186/s12888-022-04039-2
pmc: PMC9235145
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

435

Informations de copyright

© 2022. The Author(s).

Références

BMC Fam Pract. 2019 Dec 17;20(1):177
pubmed: 31847816
BMC Psychiatry. 2017 Jun 23;17(1):203
pubmed: 28641576
BJPsych Open. 2019 Apr 10;5(3):e35
pubmed: 31530306
Cult Med Psychiatry. 2021 Dec 16;:
pubmed: 34914019
Br J Psychiatry. 2017 Oct;211(4):238-245
pubmed: 28970302
Cult Med Psychiatry. 2022 Jun;46(2):475-489
pubmed: 34132955
Qual Quant. 2018;52(4):1893-1907
pubmed: 29937585
J Psychiatr Res. 2021 Dec;144:158-167
pubmed: 34638052
BMJ Open. 2015 Jul 27;5(7):e007454
pubmed: 26216150
J Med Philos. 2019 Jul 29;44(4):423-441
pubmed: 31356659
J Med Ethics. 2011 Dec;37(12):727-34
pubmed: 21947807
Palliat Med. 2013 Jan;27(1):27-37
pubmed: 23104511
Int J Law Psychiatry. 2019 May - Jun;64:150-161
pubmed: 31122625
J Med Ethics. 2015 Aug;41(8):592-8
pubmed: 25693947
Psychol Med. 2020 Jun;50(8):1241-1256
pubmed: 32482180
Sci Prog. 2021 Jul-Sep;104(3):368504211029775
pubmed: 34263672
Ann Palliat Med. 2021 Mar;10(3):3540-3553
pubmed: 32921084

Auteurs

Monica Verhofstadt (M)

End-of-Life Care Research Group, Department Public Health and Primary Care, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB) & Ghent University, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 6K3, Ghent, Brussels, Belgium. monica.verhofstadt@vub.be.

Kenneth Chambaere (K)

End-of-Life Care Research Group, Department Public Health and Primary Care, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB) & Ghent University, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 6K3, Ghent, Brussels, Belgium.

Koen Pardon (K)

End-of-Life Care Research Group, Department Public Health and Primary Care, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB) & Ghent University, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 6K3, Ghent, Brussels, Belgium.

Freddy Mortier (F)

End-of-Life Care Research Group, Department Public Health and Primary Care, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB) & Ghent University, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 6K3, Ghent, Brussels, Belgium.
Bioethics Institute Ghent, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.

Axel Liégeois (A)

Faculty of Theology and Religious Studies, KU Leuven, Louvain, Belgium.
Organisation Brothers of Charity, Ghent, Belgium.

Luc Deliens (L)

End-of-Life Care Research Group, Department Public Health and Primary Care, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB) & Ghent University, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 6K3, Ghent, Brussels, Belgium.

Kurt Audenaert (K)

Department of Psychiatry, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH