Illusion of choice? Implicit coercion and assisted dying in clinical practice.

IF 2.5 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Ruslan Zinchenko, Sheila Hollins
{"title":"Illusion of choice? Implicit coercion and assisted dying in clinical practice.","authors":"Ruslan Zinchenko, Sheila Hollins","doi":"10.1136/spcare-2026-006164","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In this article, we argue that the narrow focus on explicit coercion in assisted dying obscures more pervasive forms of implicit coercion operating at interpersonal and institutional levels. Drawing on complex adaptive systems theory, we conceptualise healthcare systems as environments in which coercive dynamics emerge non-linearly and cannot be adequately mitigated through linear procedural safeguards.We look at the potential for implicit coercion within the unique context of terminal illness and consider how end-of-life emotional distress and attachment style shape individuals' responses to vulnerability, dependency and care, influencing how choices are expressed. We also examine the erosion of personal identity in terminal illness, arguing that beyond decision-making capacity and voluntariness, the authenticity of decision-making should be an important consideration in requests for assisted dying.We then turn to structural and institutional coercion, focusing on the influence of social roles, norms and professional authority. We examine how structural constraints and choice architecture affect freedom of choice. The Mental Health Act in England and Wales is used as a case study to illustrate how institutional coercion can emerge in practice despite the presence of statutory safeguards.Finally, we argue that assisted dying legal frameworks fail to adequately address implicit coercion and offer mitigation strategies to reduce the risk of it arising in complex healthcare systems.</p>","PeriodicalId":9136,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care","volume":" ","pages":"1102-1108"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/spcare-2026-006164","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this article, we argue that the narrow focus on explicit coercion in assisted dying obscures more pervasive forms of implicit coercion operating at interpersonal and institutional levels. Drawing on complex adaptive systems theory, we conceptualise healthcare systems as environments in which coercive dynamics emerge non-linearly and cannot be adequately mitigated through linear procedural safeguards.We look at the potential for implicit coercion within the unique context of terminal illness and consider how end-of-life emotional distress and attachment style shape individuals' responses to vulnerability, dependency and care, influencing how choices are expressed. We also examine the erosion of personal identity in terminal illness, arguing that beyond decision-making capacity and voluntariness, the authenticity of decision-making should be an important consideration in requests for assisted dying.We then turn to structural and institutional coercion, focusing on the influence of social roles, norms and professional authority. We examine how structural constraints and choice architecture affect freedom of choice. The Mental Health Act in England and Wales is used as a case study to illustrate how institutional coercion can emerge in practice despite the presence of statutory safeguards.Finally, we argue that assisted dying legal frameworks fail to adequately address implicit coercion and offer mitigation strategies to reduce the risk of it arising in complex healthcare systems.

选择的错觉?临床实践中的隐性胁迫与辅助死亡。
在这篇文章中,我们认为,对协助死亡的明确强迫的狭隘关注掩盖了在人际和制度层面上运作的更普遍的隐性强迫形式。根据复杂适应系统理论,我们将医疗保健系统概念化为强制动态非线性出现的环境,并且不能通过线性程序保障措施充分缓解。我们着眼于在绝症的独特背景下隐性胁迫的潜力,并考虑临终情绪困扰和依恋类型如何塑造个体对脆弱性、依赖性和护理的反应,影响选择的表达方式。我们还研究了绝症中个人身份的侵蚀,认为除了决策能力和自愿性之外,决策的真实性应该是请求协助死亡的重要考虑因素。然后我们转向结构性和制度性强制,关注社会角色、规范和专业权威的影响。我们研究结构约束和选择架构如何影响选择自由。英格兰和威尔士的《精神卫生法》被用作案例研究,以说明尽管存在法定保障,但在实践中如何出现制度性胁迫。最后,我们认为,协助死亡的法律框架未能充分解决隐性胁迫,并提供缓解策略,以减少其在复杂的医疗保健系统中产生的风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care
BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
7.40%
发文量
170
期刊介绍: Published quarterly in print and continuously online, BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care aims to connect many disciplines and specialties throughout the world by providing high quality, clinically relevant research, reviews, comment, information and news of international importance. We hold an inclusive view of supportive and palliative care research and we are able to call on expertise to critique the whole range of methodologies within the subject, including those working in transitional research, clinical trials, epidemiology, behavioural sciences, ethics and health service research. Articles with relevance to clinical practice and clinical service development will be considered for publication. In an international context, many different categories of clinician and healthcare workers do clinical work associated with palliative medicine, specialist or generalist palliative care, supportive care, psychosocial-oncology and end of life care. We wish to engage many specialties, not only those traditionally associated with supportive and palliative care. We hope to extend the readership to doctors, nurses, other healthcare workers and researchers in medical and surgical specialties, including but not limited to cardiology, gastroenterology, geriatrics, neurology, oncology, paediatrics, primary care, psychiatry, psychology, renal medicine, respiratory medicine.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书