Den intensivvård som kan erbjudas till patienter i Sverige idag är en mycket högspecialiserad och högteknologisk vård. Den har möjliggjort livsuppehållande åtgärder till den grad att det blivit nästan omöjligt för en patient att dö utan att först blivit föremål för diskussion om att ta till alla tänkbara medel. När intensivvårdsinsatserna inte längre är meningsfulla för patienten, utan bara blir till ett utdraget lidande i väntan på döden, tas ibland beslutet att avstå eller avbryta behandling. Syftet med studien är att belysa intensivvårdssjuksköterskans upplevelse av att vårda patienter där beslut om att avstå eller avbryta behandling tagits. Metoden som använts är en litteraturstudie som bygger på 8 artiklar. Artiklarna valdes inom det kvalitativa kunskapsparadigmet. Resultatet visar att sjuksköterskor ställdes inför existentiella tankar kring liv och död, framförallt det egna livet och döden. Det skapade negativa känslor såsom förvirring, sorg, ilska och skuld. Samtidigt upplevdes det som ett privilegium att få ge avgörande vård för patienten och att möjliggöra en värdig död utan onödigt lidande för patienten och dennes närstående. Erfarna sjuksköterskor hade det lättare och var mer trygga i att avstå eller avbryta behandling än sina oerfarna kollegor. Andra kollegor beskrevs som det viktigaste och starkaste stödet. Sjuksköterskor hade svårt att beskriva vilken roll de vill att läkaren skulle ha, men det fanns en upplevelse över att ansvarsfördelningen mellan läkare sjuksköterska var oklar. Hierarkin upplevdes som ett hinder. I diskussionen belyses möjligheten att integrera den moraliska och etiska problematiken redan under utbildningen för att vara bättre förberedd och medvetandegöra värdet av handledning i yrkesmässig växt. Genom att sträva efter ett utökat tvärprofessionellt samarbete kan vården av patienter där beslut om att avstå eller avbryta intensivvård ska eller har tagits underlättas. / Program: Fristående kurs

Aim. The aim of the study is to highlight Dutch nurses’ opinions about assisted death. Background. Since 2002 it has been legally justified for physicians to assist a patients’ death in the Netherlands. Public and ethical debate, scientific research, guidelines for prudent practice and legislatures focus predominantly on the role of physicians, seemingly assuming that the tasks of other health care professionals are less important. Though, the nurse cares for the patient on a daily basis, and has a close relationship with the terminally ill and their next of kin. Method. A qualitative method was used. Twelve nurses were used in the study, and they received a questionnaire with open questions where they were supposed to motivate their personal opinions related to assisted death. Results. Three main categories (and seven sub categories) highlights the nurses’ opinions; the meeting (discussion, next of kin), inner conflicts (religion, participation) and influences (pain relief, living will, laws and criteria). Conclusions. The Swedish taboo concerning assisted death need to be removed. The quality of the palliative care is decisive of when the patients’ request of assisted death is putted. Continuous discussion elicits underlying factors of why a request of assisted death is putted. / Syfte. Syftet med studien är att belysa nederländska sjuksköterskors personliga åsikter om dödshjälp. Bakgrund. I Nederländerna har det varit lagligt för läkare att assistera en patients död sedan 2002. I den allmänna och etiska diskussionen kring beslut som rör läkarassisterad död, i forskningen, i riktlinjer och i lagstiftning fokuseras på läkarens roll, övriga vårdgivares arbetsuppgifter antas vara mindre viktiga. Detta antagande kan ifrågasättas då sjuksköterskan vårdar patienten dagligen, ofta i en nära relation till den sjuke och hans eller hennes närstående i livets slutskede. Metod. För att uppnå studiens syfte användes en kvalitativ metod. I studien ingick tolv nederländska sjuksköterskor som fick ett frågeformulär med öppna frågor där de skulle motivera sina personliga åsikter till dödshjälp. Resultat. Resultatet visar tre huvudkategorier (och sju underkategorier) som belyser sjuksköterskans åsikt; mötet (diskussion, anhöriga), inre konflikter (religion, deltagande) samt influenser (smärtlindring, testamente, lagar och kriterier). Konklusion. Den svenska tabun kring läkarassisterad död bör tas bort för att utveckla debatten. Kvaliteten på den palliativa vården avgör ofta om och när patientens förfrågan om dödshjälp kommer. Kontinuerlig diskussion tydliggör underliggande faktorer till varför en förfrågan om dödshjälp ställs.

This thesis proposes a model for legalized Physician-Assisted Suicide [PAS] for adoption into Canadian legislation. The basis of this model is one which respects the individual freedom to make end-of-life decisions free from state interference. The research herein supports the provisions contained in Oregon legislation where PAS has been legalized on the basis that the Oregon model is consistent with the guarantees afforded under s.7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Oregon maintains strict regulatory barriers which protect against the threat of abuse which the Supreme Court reasoned in Rodriguez outweighed her s.7 rights to autonomy. This thesis will engage in the theories of Ronald Dworkin who supports the preservation of the sanctity of human life which Sopinka J. held prevailed over s. 7 violations in Rodriguez and seeks a model which respects individual freedom without compromising that sanctity or value of life.

This thesis proposes a model for legalized Physician-Assisted Suicide [PAS] for adoption into Canadian legislation. The basis of this model is one which respects the individual freedom to make end-of-life decisions free from state interference. The research herein supports the provisions contained in Oregon legislation where PAS has been legalized on the basis that the Oregon model is consistent with the guarantees afforded under s.7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Oregon maintains strict regulatory barriers which protect against the threat of abuse which the Supreme Court reasoned in Rodriguez outweighed her s.7 rights to autonomy. This thesis will engage in the theories of Ronald Dworkin who supports the preservation of the sanctity of human life which Sopinka J. held prevailed over s. 7 violations in Rodriguez and seeks a model which respects individual freedom without compromising that sanctity or value of life.

<p>Aim. The aim of the study is to highlight Dutch nurses’ opinions about assisted death. Background. Since 2002 it has been legally justified for physicians to assist a patients’ death in the Netherlands. Public and ethical debate, scientific research, guidelines for prudent practice and legislatures focus predominantly on the role of physicians, seemingly assuming that the tasks of other health care professionals are less important. Though, the nurse cares for the patient on a daily basis, and has a close relationship with the terminally ill and their next of kin. Method. A qualitative method was used. Twelve nurses were used in the study, and they received a questionnaire with open questions where they were supposed to motivate their personal opinions related to assisted death. Results. Three main categories (and seven sub categories) highlights the nurses’ opinions; the meeting (discussion, next of kin), inner conflicts (religion, participation) and influences (pain relief, living will, laws and criteria). Conclusions. The Swedish taboo concerning assisted death need to be removed. The quality of the palliative care is decisive of when the patients’ request of assisted death is putted. Continuous discussion elicits underlying factors of why a request of assisted death is putted.</p> / <p>Syfte. Syftet med studien är att belysa nederländska sjuksköterskors personliga åsikter om dödshjälp. Bakgrund. I Nederländerna har det varit lagligt för läkare att assistera en patients död sedan 2002. I den allmänna och etiska diskussionen kring beslut som rör läkarassisterad död, i forskningen, i riktlinjer och i lagstiftning fokuseras på läkarens roll, övriga vårdgivares arbetsuppgifter antas vara mindre viktiga. Detta antagande kan ifrågasättas då sjuksköterskan vårdar patienten dagligen, ofta i en nära relation till den sjuke och hans eller hennes närstående i livets slutskede. Metod. För att uppnå studiens syfte användes en kvalitativ metod. I studien ingick tolv nederländska sjuksköterskor som fick ett frågeformulär med öppna frågor där de skulle motivera sina personliga åsikter till dödshjälp. Resultat. Resultatet visar tre huvudkategorier (och sju underkategorier) som belyser sjuksköterskans åsikt; mötet (diskussion, anhöriga), inre konflikter (religion, deltagande) samt influenser (smärtlindring, testamente, lagar och kriterier). Konklusion. Den svenska tabun kring läkarassisterad död bör tas bort för att utveckla debatten. Kvaliteten på den palliativa vården avgör ofta om och när patientens förfrågan om dödshjälp kommer. Kontinuerlig diskussion tydliggör underliggande faktorer till varför en förfrågan om dödshjälp ställs.</p>

No description available.

The starting point of the present thesis is nurses’ reported experiences of disagreements with physicians for pushing life sustaining treatment too far. The overall aim was to describe and compare nurses’ and physicians’ perspectives on the boundaries for life-sustaining treatment and to evaluate whether ethics rounds could promote mutual understanding and stimulate ethical reflection. A mixed methods design with qualitative and quantitative data was used, including interviews and questionnaires. The health professionals’ experiences/perceptions were based on known patients foremost from general wards, but also intensive care units, at four Swedish hospitals. The first two studies treated the perspective on boundaries for life-sustaining treatment and the last two evaluated philosopher- ethicist led ethics rounds. Analysis of data was performed using a phenomenological approach and content analysis as well as comparative and descriptive non-parametric statistics. In the first study, the essence of the physicians’ decision-making process to limit life-sustaining treatment for ICU patients, was a process of principally medical considerations in discussions with other physicians. In the second study, there were more similarities than differences between nurses’ and physicians’ opinions regarding the 714 patients studied. The physicians considered limited treatment as often as the nurses did. The ethics rounds studies generated mixed experiences/perceptions. It seemed that more progress was made toward the goal of promoting mutual understanding than toward the goal of stimulating ethical reflection. Above all, the rounds seemed to meet the need for a forum for crossing over professional boundaries. The most salient finding was the insight to enhance team collaboration, that the interprofessional dialogue was sure to continue. Predominating new insights after rounds were interpreted as corresponding to a hermeneutic approach. One of nurses’ negative experiences of the ethics rounds was associated with the lack of solutions. Based on the present findings, one suggestion for improvement of the model of ethics rounds is made with regard to achieving a balance between ethical analyses, conflict resolution and problem solving. In conclusion, the present thesis provides strong evidence that differences in opinions regarding boundaries for life-sustaining treatment are not associated with professional status. The findings support the notion of a collaborative team approach to end-of-life decision-making for patients with diminished decisionmaking capacity. There is an indication that stimulation of ethical reflection in relation to known patients may foremost yield psychosocial insights. This could imply that social conflicts may overshadow ethical analysis or that ethical conflicts and social conflicts are impossible to distinguish.

Des décisions médicales en fin de vie sont souvent prises pour des patients inaptes. Nous avons souhaité connaître les argumentations éthiques entourant ces décisions difficiles. Notre objectif était de pouvoir comprendre et apprécier ces lignes d’argumentation. Pour atteindre cet objectif, nous avons répertorié et analysé les lignes argumentatives présentes dans des articles scientifiques, incluant les sections de correspondance et commentaires des journaux savants. Afin d’éviter que les résultats de notre analyse soient trop influencés par les caractéristiques d’un problème médical spécifique, nous avons décidé d’analyser des situations cliniques distinctes. Les sujets spécifiques étudiés sont la non-initiation du traitement antibiotique chez des patients déments souffrant de pneumonie, et l’euthanasie de nouveau-nés lourdement hypothéqués selon le protocole de Groningen. Notre analyse des lignes d’argumentation répertoriées à partir des débats entourant ces sujets spécifiques a révélé des caractéristiques communes. D’abord, les arguments avancés avaient une forte tendance à viser la normativité. Ensuite, les lignes d’argumentation répertoriées étaient principalement axées sur les patients inaptes et excluaient largement les intérêts d’autrui. Nous n’avons trouvé aucune des lignes d’argumentation à visée normative répertoriés concluante. De plus, nous avons trouvé que l’exclusion catégorique d’arguments visant l’intérêt d’autrui des considérations entrainait l’impossibilité d’ évaluer leur validité et de les exclure définitivement de l’argumentaire. Leur présence non-explicite et cachée dans les raisonnements motivant les décisions ne pouvait alors pas être exclue non plus. Pour mieux mettre en relief ces conclusions, nous avons rédigé un commentaire inspiré par les argumentaires avancés dans le contexte de l’arrêt de traitement de Terri Schiavo, patiente en état végétatif persistant. Nous pensons que l’utilisation d’un argumentaire qui viserait davantage à rendre les actions intelligibles, et sans visée normative immédiate, pourrait contribuer à une meilleure compréhension réciproque des participants au débat. Une telle argumentation nous semble aussi mieux adaptée à la complexité et l’unicité de chaque cas. Nous pensons qu’elle pourrait mieux décrire les motivations de tous les acteurs participant à la décision, et ainsi contribuer à une plus grande transparence. Cette transparence pourrait renforcer la confiance dans l’authenticité du débat, et ainsi contribuer à une meilleure légitimation de pratiques cliniques. / Medical decision making is often occurring at the end of life of inapt patients. We wished to learn about and appreciate the ethical arguments concerning these difficult decisions. Our objective was to understand and evaluate these lines of argument. To reach this objective, we have listed and analyzed lines of argument as they were presented in scientific articles, including the sections correspondence and commentary of scholarly journals. In order to avoid that our results are too much influenced by the specifics of one given clinical problem, we decided to analyze distinct clinical settings. The specific subjects studied are the non-initiation of antibiotic treatment for demented patients suffering from pneumonia, and active euthanasia of severely affected newborns following the Groningen protocol. Our analysis of the indexed lines of arguments from debates dealing with these specific subjects has revealed common characteristics. First, the issued argumentations had a strong normative tendency. Second, the indexed argumentation was principally oriented towards the patient himself, while largely excluding the interests of others. We found that none of the indexed normative lines of argument was compelling. Moreover, we found that the systematic exclusion of arguments based on the interests of others entailed the impossibility to evaluate them, and potentially to exclude them definitively from the considerations. It was thus also impossible to evaluate their potentially concealed persistence as a driving force motivating the decisions made. In order to illuminate these conclusions, we have written a commentary inspired by the lines of arguments evoked in the context of the treatment withdrawal of Terri Schiavo, a patient in persistently vegetative state. We believe that the use of lines of argument that render decisions intelligible, without however aiming at immediate normativity, could contribute to a better mutual understanding between the participants of such debates. Such argumentation also seems, in our opinion, more adapted to take the complexity and uniqueness of each single clinical case into account. We believe that such argumentation could better describe the respective motivations of the participants in the decision, and thus increase its transparency. Increased transparency would reinforce the confidence in the authenticity of the debate, and thus better legitimate clinical practice.

Sammanfattning Syftet med litteraturstudien var att beskriva sjuksköterskors inställning till eutanasi. Metoden var en beskrivande litteraturstudie. Av 220 artiklar valdes 14 artiklar med kvalitativ eller kvantitativ ansats. Resultatet visade att eutanasi är en komplex fråga där olika etiska och moraliska aspekter spelar in. Sjuksköterskorna ansåg att eutanasi kunde vara etiskt försvarbart för värnandet av patientens autonomi, vid svår obotlig sjukdom, om alla andra behandlingsmetoder blivit uttömda samt om patienten själv tog upp förfrågan om eutanasi. Argument emot eutanasi var att sjuksköterskan har en livsbevarande roll, att risk för missbruk av eutanasi kan förekomma samt religiösa skäl. Yngre deltagare och de med lägre utbildning var mer positiva till eutanasi medan äldre sjuksköterskor och de med högre utbildning hade en mer negativ inställning. Inställningen till eutanasi skilde sig beroende på vart sjuksköterskorna arbetade t.ex. vid intensivvårds-, palliativ- eller pediatrisk vårdavdelning. De som arbetade inom pediatrisk och palliativ vård var i högre omfattning emot mot eutanasi. Sjuksköterskor som uppgavs sig vara religiösa var mer negativt inställda till eutanasi och till legalisering av eutanasi. I länder där eutanasi är legaliserat pågår diskussioner om sjuksköterskans roll inom eutanasivården och dess beslutsprocess. Slutsatsen är att frågor kring eutanasi är viktigt att undersöka, inte bara allmänhetens inställning utan även olika professioners reflektioner. Debatten kring eutanasi kommer att fortgå.   Nyckelord: eutanasi, sjuksköterskors inställningar, palliativ vård, beslut i livets slutskede / Abstract The aim of this literature review was to describe nurse’s attitudes towards euthanasia. The method used was a descriptive design. Of the 220 hits, 14 was chosen by CINAHL and PubMed (MedLine) and then analyzed. Both qualitative and quantitative aspects were included. The results showed that euthanasia is a complex issue where many ethical and moral aspects come in to play. The nurses felt that euthanasia was ethically acceptable for safeguarding patient autonomy, but also when patients’ suffered from incurable disease and severe pain therefore requested euthanasia. Arguments against euthanasia where directed towards the nurse’s role as lifesaver and preserver of life, the risk of misuse and religious beliefs. The study showed that younger nurses and those with lower formal education where more prone to the use of euthanasia than elderly nurses and those with higher education. Attitudes toward euthanasia differed depending on what type of ward the nurses worked in, for example at intensive care units, palliative care or pediatrics. Those who work in pediatric wards or with palliative care are those who more often oppose the use of euthanasia. Nurses who described themselves as religious often argued against the use of euthanasia and its legislation. In countries where euthanasia is legal there is an ongoing debate about nurses’ role in euthanasia and in its decision processing. The conclusion is that questions regarding euthanasia are important to investigate, not only by exploring the public’s attitudes but also by exploring the reflections of professionals. The debates will continue regarding euthanasia.  Keywords: Euthanasia, nurses’ attitudes, palliative care, end of life decisions

Des décisions médicales en fin de vie sont souvent prises pour des patients inaptes. Nous avons souhaité connaître les argumentations éthiques entourant ces décisions difficiles. Notre objectif était de pouvoir comprendre et apprécier ces lignes d’argumentation. Pour atteindre cet objectif, nous avons répertorié et analysé les lignes argumentatives présentes dans des articles scientifiques, incluant les sections de correspondance et commentaires des journaux savants. Afin d’éviter que les résultats de notre analyse soient trop influencés par les caractéristiques d’un problème médical spécifique, nous avons décidé d’analyser des situations cliniques distinctes. Les sujets spécifiques étudiés sont la non-initiation du traitement antibiotique chez des patients déments souffrant de pneumonie, et l’euthanasie de nouveau-nés lourdement hypothéqués selon le protocole de Groningen. Notre analyse des lignes d’argumentation répertoriées à partir des débats entourant ces sujets spécifiques a révélé des caractéristiques communes. D’abord, les arguments avancés avaient une forte tendance à viser la normativité. Ensuite, les lignes d’argumentation répertoriées étaient principalement axées sur les patients inaptes et excluaient largement les intérêts d’autrui. Nous n’avons trouvé aucune des lignes d’argumentation à visée normative répertoriés concluante. De plus, nous avons trouvé que l’exclusion catégorique d’arguments visant l’intérêt d’autrui des considérations entrainait l’impossibilité d’ évaluer leur validité et de les exclure définitivement de l’argumentaire. Leur présence non-explicite et cachée dans les raisonnements motivant les décisions ne pouvait alors pas être exclue non plus. Pour mieux mettre en relief ces conclusions, nous avons rédigé un commentaire inspiré par les argumentaires avancés dans le contexte de l’arrêt de traitement de Terri Schiavo, patiente en état végétatif persistant. Nous pensons que l’utilisation d’un argumentaire qui viserait davantage à rendre les actions intelligibles, et sans visée normative immédiate, pourrait contribuer à une meilleure compréhension réciproque des participants au débat. Une telle argumentation nous semble aussi mieux adaptée à la complexité et l’unicité de chaque cas. Nous pensons qu’elle pourrait mieux décrire les motivations de tous les acteurs participant à la décision, et ainsi contribuer à une plus grande transparence. Cette transparence pourrait renforcer la confiance dans l’authenticité du débat, et ainsi contribuer à une meilleure légitimation de pratiques cliniques. / Medical decision making is often occurring at the end of life of inapt patients. We wished to learn about and appreciate the ethical arguments concerning these difficult decisions. Our objective was to understand and evaluate these lines of argument. To reach this objective, we have listed and analyzed lines of argument as they were presented in scientific articles, including the sections correspondence and commentary of scholarly journals. In order to avoid that our results are too much influenced by the specifics of one given clinical problem, we decided to analyze distinct clinical settings. The specific subjects studied are the non-initiation of antibiotic treatment for demented patients suffering from pneumonia, and active euthanasia of severely affected newborns following the Groningen protocol. Our analysis of the indexed lines of arguments from debates dealing with these specific subjects has revealed common characteristics. First, the issued argumentations had a strong normative tendency. Second, the indexed argumentation was principally oriented towards the patient himself, while largely excluding the interests of others. We found that none of the indexed normative lines of argument was compelling. Moreover, we found that the systematic exclusion of arguments based on the interests of others entailed the impossibility to evaluate them, and potentially to exclude them definitively from the considerations. It was thus also impossible to evaluate their potentially concealed persistence as a driving force motivating the decisions made. In order to illuminate these conclusions, we have written a commentary inspired by the lines of arguments evoked in the context of the treatment withdrawal of Terri Schiavo, a patient in persistently vegetative state. We believe that the use of lines of argument that render decisions intelligible, without however aiming at immediate normativity, could contribute to a better mutual understanding between the participants of such debates. Such argumentation also seems, in our opinion, more adapted to take the complexity and uniqueness of each single clinical case into account. We believe that such argumentation could better describe the respective motivations of the participants in the decision, and thus increase its transparency. Increased transparency would reinforce the confidence in the authenticity of the debate, and thus better legitimate clinical practice.