医生协助死亡——重新审视的伦理困境

Manisha Singh
{"title":"医生协助死亡——重新审视的伦理困境","authors":"Manisha Singh","doi":"10.31579/2834-5142/028","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Physicians often face ethical dilemmas when providing advice regarding withdrawal of care. In the nephrology world, we are especially at risk due to the high mortality of our patients. Yet our training tends to lag behind in certain aspects of end of life goals of care discussions. Some of our patients enquire regarding physician-assisted death (PAD) as an option and our current training does not enable us to provide an informed answer. In end-stage-renal patients, opting out of dialysis will certainly result in a rapid demise for most, however, some patients request further assistance. We updated information to be, at the least, able to help our most vulnerable patients with the information. The process of dying, sometimes prolonged to weeks, is a very painful procedure, and not under the patient's control. Withdrawal of care, even with the best palliative care options, does not always result in the control that physician-assisted death (PAD) can provide. It appears as a reasonable option to some patients at the end of life. Is PAD a part of doing “everything that can be done” to keep a patient comfortable (as a part of comfort goals of care)? The provision exists in certain states. However, moving to another state at the end of life is not really practical or even a kind option to consider. A physician can have moral and ethical dilemma around these queries. Our paper discusses available data on this issue intending to empower providers with optimal information. Professional position guidelines do not agree with or recommend physician-assisted-death. This knowledge helps clear the conscience of providers knowing that, at the least, we are doing what most other physicians would do. The question remains: Is PAD a part of “everything that can be done” for the patient? This manuscript aims to update regarding this issue especially as there have been recently active discussions worldwide with the launch of newer technology-assisted death. We present a case modified extensively from real life cases for academic discussion only. We do not provide any recommendation regarding the practice.","PeriodicalId":382890,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Clinical Nephrology","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Physician Assisted Death -An Ethical Dilemma Revisited\",\"authors\":\"Manisha Singh\",\"doi\":\"10.31579/2834-5142/028\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Physicians often face ethical dilemmas when providing advice regarding withdrawal of care. In the nephrology world, we are especially at risk due to the high mortality of our patients. Yet our training tends to lag behind in certain aspects of end of life goals of care discussions. Some of our patients enquire regarding physician-assisted death (PAD) as an option and our current training does not enable us to provide an informed answer. In end-stage-renal patients, opting out of dialysis will certainly result in a rapid demise for most, however, some patients request further assistance. We updated information to be, at the least, able to help our most vulnerable patients with the information. The process of dying, sometimes prolonged to weeks, is a very painful procedure, and not under the patient's control. Withdrawal of care, even with the best palliative care options, does not always result in the control that physician-assisted death (PAD) can provide. It appears as a reasonable option to some patients at the end of life. Is PAD a part of doing “everything that can be done” to keep a patient comfortable (as a part of comfort goals of care)? The provision exists in certain states. However, moving to another state at the end of life is not really practical or even a kind option to consider. A physician can have moral and ethical dilemma around these queries. Our paper discusses available data on this issue intending to empower providers with optimal information. Professional position guidelines do not agree with or recommend physician-assisted-death. This knowledge helps clear the conscience of providers knowing that, at the least, we are doing what most other physicians would do. The question remains: Is PAD a part of “everything that can be done” for the patient? This manuscript aims to update regarding this issue especially as there have been recently active discussions worldwide with the launch of newer technology-assisted death. We present a case modified extensively from real life cases for academic discussion only. We do not provide any recommendation regarding the practice.\",\"PeriodicalId\":382890,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Clinical Nephrology\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Clinical Nephrology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31579/2834-5142/028\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Clinical Nephrology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31579/2834-5142/028","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

医生在提供关于退出治疗的建议时经常面临伦理困境。在肾病学领域,由于患者的高死亡率,我们尤其处于危险之中。然而,我们的培训往往落后于某些方面的临终关怀目标的讨论。我们的一些病人询问关于医生协助死亡(PAD)作为一种选择,我们目前的培训不使我们能够提供一个知情的答案。对于终末期肾脏病患者,选择退出透析肯定会导致大多数患者迅速死亡,然而,一些患者要求进一步的帮助。我们更新信息,至少能够帮助我们最脆弱的病人。死亡的过程有时会持续数周,这是一个非常痛苦的过程,病人无法控制。即使有最好的姑息治疗选择,撤回治疗并不总是导致医生协助死亡(PAD)所能提供的控制。对于一些临终病人来说,这似乎是一个合理的选择。PAD是“尽一切可能”保持患者舒适的一部分吗(作为舒适护理目标的一部分)?这项规定在某些州存在。然而,在生命结束时搬到另一个州并不实际,甚至不是一个值得考虑的友好选择。医生可能会在这些问题上陷入道德和伦理困境。我们的论文讨论了关于这个问题的可用数据,旨在为提供者提供最佳信息。专业职位指南不同意或推荐医生协助死亡。这些知识有助于让医生的良心清醒,至少他们知道,我们在做大多数其他医生会做的事情。问题仍然存在:PAD是患者“一切可以做”的一部分吗?这份手稿的目的是更新关于这一问题,特别是最近有积极的讨论在世界范围内推出新的技术辅助死亡。我们提出了一个从真实生活案例中广泛修改的案例,仅供学术讨论。我们不提供任何关于实践的建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Physician Assisted Death -An Ethical Dilemma Revisited
Physicians often face ethical dilemmas when providing advice regarding withdrawal of care. In the nephrology world, we are especially at risk due to the high mortality of our patients. Yet our training tends to lag behind in certain aspects of end of life goals of care discussions. Some of our patients enquire regarding physician-assisted death (PAD) as an option and our current training does not enable us to provide an informed answer. In end-stage-renal patients, opting out of dialysis will certainly result in a rapid demise for most, however, some patients request further assistance. We updated information to be, at the least, able to help our most vulnerable patients with the information. The process of dying, sometimes prolonged to weeks, is a very painful procedure, and not under the patient's control. Withdrawal of care, even with the best palliative care options, does not always result in the control that physician-assisted death (PAD) can provide. It appears as a reasonable option to some patients at the end of life. Is PAD a part of doing “everything that can be done” to keep a patient comfortable (as a part of comfort goals of care)? The provision exists in certain states. However, moving to another state at the end of life is not really practical or even a kind option to consider. A physician can have moral and ethical dilemma around these queries. Our paper discusses available data on this issue intending to empower providers with optimal information. Professional position guidelines do not agree with or recommend physician-assisted-death. This knowledge helps clear the conscience of providers knowing that, at the least, we are doing what most other physicians would do. The question remains: Is PAD a part of “everything that can be done” for the patient? This manuscript aims to update regarding this issue especially as there have been recently active discussions worldwide with the launch of newer technology-assisted death. We present a case modified extensively from real life cases for academic discussion only. We do not provide any recommendation regarding the practice.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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