Patients' knowledge of options at the end of life: ignorance in the face of death

CONTEXT: Effectiveness of legislation promoting advance directives and legalizing physician-assisted suicide depends on patients' understanding their legal options about end-of-life care. However, outpatients' understanding of their legal options at the end of life has not been studied. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the percentage of outpatients who are informed about 4 areas relevant to end-of-life care: refusal and withdrawal of lifesaving treatments, physician-assisted suicide, active euthanasia, and double effect; and to determine whether authoring advance directives, experiencing illness, acting as a proxy for health care decisions, and caring for an ill loved one are associated with better knowledge in end-of-life care. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: One thousand consecutive English-speaking, adult patients attending 1 university-based internal medicine clinic and 3 community-based, university-affiliated, mixed internal medicine and family practice clinics in Oregon during May and June 1999. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Percentage of correct responses in the 4 topic areas and total knowledge score, adjusted for demographic (eg, age, race, educational level, income level, marital status) and experiential (eg, health, proxy decision making, advance directives, and death of a loved one) factors. RESULTS: Of the 1000 patients invited to participate, 728 (73%) consented and completed the questionnaire and were included in the analysis. A total of 69% of respondents answered correctly regarding refusal of treatment, 46% for withdrawal of treatment, 23% for assisted suicide, 32% for active euthanasia, and 41% for double effect. Sixty-two percent of respondents did not distinguish between assisted suicide and euthanasia. After adjustment for other covariates, better knowledge was significantly associated with white race (odds ratio [OR], 2.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-4.2), having at least a college degree (OR, 3.0; 95% CI, 1.4-6.7), and having been a proxy for health care decisions (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.2-2.6). Personal experience with illness (OR, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.6-1.5), death or illness of a loved one (OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.0-2.7), and authoring an advance directive (OR,1.3; 95% CI, 0.9-2.0) were not associated with better knowledge. CONCLUSIONS: A significant proportion of outpatients at university-affiliated clinics in Oregon appear to misunderstand options in end-of-life care. Our results suggest that greater public knowledge about end-of-life care is needed, and advance care planning must be preceded by education about options in end-of-life care. JAMA. 2000;284:2483-2488.     

Public attitudes toward the right to die.

OBJECTIVE: To determine public attitudes toward the right to die, euthanasia and related end-of-life decisions. DESIGN: Mail survey based on telephone numbers randomly selected by computer. SETTING: Edmonton. PARTICIPANTS: Of 1347 computer-generated, randomly selected telephone numbers called between February and June 1992, 902 individuals were reached, and 500 eligible contacts (55%) agreed to fill out the mailed questionnaire based on 12 vignettes involving end-of-life decisions. A total of 356 usable questionnaires (71%) were subsequently returned. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Attitudes toward end-of-life decisions including withdrawal of life support, euthanasia, chronic suffering and the right to die, living wills and family involvement in decision making for incompetent individuals. Comments and demographic data were also solicited. RESULTS: Of the respondents 84% supported a family's right to withdraw life support from a patient in a persistent coma, and 90% supported a mentally competent patient's right to request that life support be withdrawn. Active euthanasia was supported by 65% for only patients experiencing severe pain and terminal illness. There was marked opposition to euthanasia for patients in other circumstances, such as an elderly disabled person who feels he or she is a burden on relatives (opposed by 65%), a patient with chronic depression resistant to treatment (by 75%) or an elderly person no longer satisfied with life and who has various minor physical ailments (by 83%). In all, 63% of the respondents felt that legalization of euthanasia for terminal illnesses would lead to euthanasia for many other, unsupported reasons, and 34% supported legislation to prohibit euthanasia in all situations. CONCLUSIONS: Public support for the right to die varies depending on the circumstances of the patient. The single most significant factor determining attitudes was the level of religious activity. The family's wishes were an important factor in end-of-life decisions for patients unable to communicate their desires. Both the general public and physicians should be primary participants in determining legislation regarding the right to die.     

Comparison of patients' and health care professionals' attitudes towards advance directives.

OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to identify and compare the attitudes of patients and health care professionals towards advance directives. Advance directives promote recognition of the patient's autonomy, letting the individual exercise a certain measure of control over life-sustaining care and treatment in the eventuality of becoming incompetent. DESIGN: Attitudes to advance directives were evaluated using a 44-item self-reported questionnaire. It yields an overall score as well as five factor scores: autonomy, beneficence, justice, external norms, and the affective dimension. SETTING: Health care institutions in the province of Québec, Canada. Survey sample: The sampling consisted of 921 subjects: 123 patients, 167 physicians, 340 nurses and 291 administrators of health care institutions. RESULTS: Although the general attitude of each population was favourable to the expression of autonomy, multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) indicated that physicians attached less importance to this subscale than did other populations (p < .001). Above all, they favoured legal external norms and beneficence. Physicians and administrators also attached less importance to the affective dimension than did patients and nurses. Specifically, physicians' attitudes towards advance directives were shown to be less positive than patients' attitudes. CONCLUSION: More attention should be given to the importance of adequately informing patients about advance directives because they may not represent an adequate means for patients to assert their autonomy.     

Relationships between various attitudes towards self-determination in health care with special reference to an advance directive

OBJECTIVES: The subject of patient self-determination in health care has gained broad interest because of the increasing number of incompetent patients. In an attempt to solve the problems related to doctors' decision making in such circumstances, advance directives have been developed. The purpose of this study was to examine relationships between public attitudes towards patient autonomy and advance directives. SUBJECTS AND MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: A stratified random sample of 600 adults in northern Sweden was surveyed by a questionnaire with a response rate of 78.2%. The subjects were asked about their wish for control of their health care, their concerns about health care, their treatment preferences in a life-threatening situation (both reversible and irreversible), and their attitudes towards the application of advance directives. RESULTS: Numerous relationships between various aspects of self-determination in health care (desire for control, fears of over-treatment, and choice of treatment level) in general and advance directives, in particular, were found. Those who wanted to have a say in their health care (about 94%) also mainly supported the use of an advance directive. CONCLUSIONS: The fact that almost 30% of the respondents were undecided concerning their personal use of advance directives points to a lack of knowledge and to the necessity of education of the public on these issues.     

Family physicians' attitudes toward advance directives.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the attitudes toward, the experience with and the knowledge of advance directives of family physicians in Ontario. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. PARTICIPANTS: A questionnaire was mailed to 1000 family physicians, representing a random sample of one-third of the active members of the Ontario College of Family Physicians; 643 (64%) responded. RESULTS: In all, 86% of the physicians favoured the use of advance directives, but only 19% had ever discussed them with more than 10 patients. Most of the physicians agreed with statements supporting the use of advance directives and disagreed with statements opposing their use. Of the respondents 80% reported that they had never used a directive in managing an incompetent patient. Of the physicians who responded that they had such experience, over half said that they had not always followed the directions contained in the directive. The proportions of physicians who responded that certain patient groups should be offered the opportunity to complete an advance directive were 96% for terminally ill patients, 95% for chronically ill patients, 85% for people with human immunodeficiency virus infection, 77% for people over 65 years of age, 43% for all adults, 40% for people admitted to hospital on an elective basis and 33% for people admitted on an emergency basis. The proportions of physicians who felt that the following strategies would encourage them to offer advance directives to their patients were 92% for public education, 90% for professional education, 89% for legislation protecting physicians against liability when following a directive, 80% for legislation supporting the use of directives, 79% for hospital policy supporting the use of directives, 73% for reimbursement for time spent discussing directives with patients and 64% for hospital policy requiring that all patients be routinely offered the opportunity to complete a directive at the time of admission. CONCLUSIONS: Family physicians favour advance directives but use them infrequently. Most physicians support offering them to terminally or chronically ill patients but not to all patients at the time of admission to hospital. Although governments emphasize legislation, most physicians believe that public and professional education programs would be at least as likely as legislation to encourage them to offer advance directives to their patients.     

Attitudes of Hungarian students and nurses to physician assisted suicide

In Hungary, which has one of the highest rates of suicide in the world, physician assisted suicide (PAS) and euthanasia are punishable criminal acts. Attitudes towards self destruction and assisted suicide are, however, very controversial. We investigated the attitudes of medical students, nurses and social science students in Hungary towards PAS, using a twelve item scale: the total number of participants was 242. Our results indicate a particular and controversial relationship between attitudes towards assisted suicide in Hungary and experience with terminally ill people. The social science students, who had the fewest personal experiences with terminally ill patients, are characterised by the most permissive attitudes towards assisted suicide. Nurses, who had everyday contact and experience with these patients, were the most conservative, being least supportive of assisted suicide. The attitudes of medical students, the would be physicians, are somewhere between those of nurses and social science students.     

The impact on patient trust of legalising physician aid in dying

OBJECTIVE: Little empirical evidence exists to support either side of the ongoing debate over whether legalising physician aid in dying would undermine patient trust. DESIGN: A random national sample of 1117 US adults were asked about their level of agreement with a statement that they would trust their doctor less if "euthanasia were legal [and] doctors were allowed to help patients die". RESULTS: There was disagreement by 58% of the participants, and agreement by only 20% that legalising euthanasia would cause them to trust their personal physician less. The remainder were neutral. These attitudes were the same in men and women, but older people and black people had more agreement that euthanasia would lower trust. However, overall, only 27% of elderly people (age 65+) and 32% of black people thought that physician aid in dying would lower trust. These views differed with physical and mental health, and also with education and income, with those having more of these attributes tending to view physician aid in dying somewhat more favourably. Again, however, overall views in most of these subgroups were positive. Views about the effect of physician aid in dying on trust were significantly correlated with participants' underlying trust in their physicians and their satisfaction with care. In a multivariate regression model, trust, satisfaction, age, and white/black race remained independently significant. CONCLUSION: Despite the widespread concern that legalising physician aid in dying would seriously threaten or undermine trust in physicians, the weight of the evidence in the USA is to the contrary, although views vary significantly.     

Advance directives: the views of health care professionals.

OBJECTIVES: This study examined the views and experiences of 20 physicians and 20 nurses at a major Canadian teaching hospital regarding the use of advance directives in clinical care. DESIGN: The participants were purposively drawn from four clinical specialties: family and community medicine, oncology, intensive care and geriatrics. Detailed interviews were conducted in person. Content analysis was used to code the data, which were further analysed with both quantitative and qualitative techniques. MAIN RESULTS: Thirty-nine of the 40 participants favoured the use of advance directives in clinical care; physicians had somewhat less positive attitudes than nurses toward such directives. Advance directives were thought by participants to be helpful in resolving disagreements between patients and their families about treatment options; in making patients more comfortable, both physically and psychologically, during the process of dying; and in opening up communication and trust among patients, their families and health care professionals. Concerns about the use of advance directives focused on the lack of clarity in some patients' instructions, the absence of legal status for directives, the possible interference with a practitioner's clinical judgement, the adequacy and appropriateness of patients' information about their circumstances, and the type of intervention (passive or active) requested by patients. CONCLUSIONS: New regulations and legislation are making the use of advance directives more widespread. Health care professionals should participate in the development and implementation of these directives. Continuing professional education is essential in this regard.     

Canadian outpatients and advance directives: poor knowledge and little experience but positive attitudes.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the knowledge of, previous experience with, attitudes toward and perceived barriers to completing advance directives among outpatients at two general medicine clinics. DESIGN: Cross-sectional questionnaire administered in face-to-face structured interviews. SETTING: General internal-medicine outpatient clinics at a university teaching hospital. PATIENTS: One hundred and five adult outpatients who could communicate in spoken English and who consented to be interviewed. RESULTS: Of 167 patients approached, 58 were excluded because they could not communicate in spoken English, and 4 refused to participate. Of the remaining 105 patients, 17 (16%) knew about living wills, 12 (11%) about durable powers of attorney for health care and 4 (4%) about advance directives. Twenty-three (22%) had thought about their preferences for life-sustaining treatment, 20 (19%) had discussed them, none had written them down, and 45 (43%) had thought about choosing a proxy. Sixty-one (58%) wanted to think about their preferences for treatment, 65 (62%) wanted to discuss them, 32 (30%) wanted to write them down, and 80 (76%) wanted to choose a proxy. The perceived barriers to completing an advance directive were inability to write, the belief that an advance directive was unnecessary, a fatalistic attitude, previous discussion of preferences, a desire to leave the decision to doctors, uncertainty about preferences, a desire to discuss preferences rather than document them, a desire to wait until the situation arose, a desire to write down preferences in the future and a desire to avoid thinking about preferences or advance directives. Respondents with more knowledge of life-sustaining treatments were more likely to want to complete an advance directive. CONCLUSIONS: Outpatients have positive attitudes toward advance directives, but their knowledge and experience are limited. These data underscore the need for patient education and for policies to eliminate the barriers to completing advance directives that patients face.     

香港市民和护士对预前指示及末期病患者采用维持生命治疗看法的调查研究

本研究目的是分析香港市民和注册护士对预前指示的态度和使用时所考虑的因素，及他们对垂死病患者采用维持生命治疗的看法。结果显示年龄和学历高的受访者普遍接受预前指示．市民和护士的看法不同。预前指示普及已是社会的趋势，但现时社会预前指示的理解如维持生命治疗的决策过程仍模糊不清，唯医护人员的理解较深。因此，医护人员对预前指示这一概念的推广和教育上应兼付什么责任的问题值得思考。     

Autonomy, informed consent and advance directives: a study of physician attitudes

The rights of patients to make decisions concerning their care have been promoted by ethical guidelines under the banner of respect for autonomy, and by legal statutes that address informed consent requirements and advance directives. Given these trends, this study investigated the opinions of 90 physicians specializing in family practice and internal medicine at the Joan C. Edwards Marshall University School of Medicine and the West Virginia University School of Medicine in relation to physician-patient communication. Beliefs and attitudes of these physicians with respect to the participation of patients and family members in medical decisions were explored, using a survey instrument with closed questions. Although physicians surveyed showed respect for the primary elements of informed consent and supported stronger patients' rights, many respondents reported a willingness to override the explicit directives of patients, based on the requests of surrogates. These results reveal a conflict between current ethical and legal standards and the moral intuitions of many practicing physicians. More research focusing explicitly on the role and authority of surrogate decision-makers is warranted.     

Doctors' and nurses' attitudes towards and experiences of voluntary euthanasia: survey of members of the Japanese Association of Palliative Medicine

OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate Japanese doctors' and nurses' attitudes towards and practices of voluntary euthanasia (VE) and to compare their attitudes and practices in this regard. DESIGN: Postal survey, conducted between October and December 1999, using a self-administered questionnaire. PARTCIPANTS: All doctor members and nurse members of the Japanese Association of Palliative Medicine. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Doctors' and nurses' attitude towards and practices of VE. RESULTS: We received 366 completed questionnaires from 642 doctors surveyed (response rate, 58%) and 145 from 217 nurses surveyed (68%). A total of 54% (95% confidence interval (CI): 49-59) of the responding doctors and 53% (CI: 45-61) of the responding nurses had been asked by patients to hasten death, of whom 5% (CI: 2-8) of the former and none of the latter had taken active steps to bring about death. Although 88% (CI: 83-92) of the doctors and 85% (CI: 77-93) of the nurses answered that a patient's request to hasten death can sometimes be rational, only 33% (CI: 28-38) and 23% (CI: 16-30) respectively regarded VE as ethically right and 22% (CI: 18-36) and 15% (CI: 8-20) respectively would practise VE if it were legal. Logistic regression model analysis showed that the respondents' profession was not a statistically independent factor predicting his or her response to any question regarding attitudes towards VE. CONCLUSIONS: A minority of responding doctors and nurses thought VE was ethically or legally acceptable. There seems no significant difference in attitudes towards VE between the doctors and nurses. However, only doctors had practised VE.     

Physicians' attitudes on advance directives

Advance directives provide means for competent individuals to influence treatment decisions in the event of serious illness and subsequent loss of competence, the "living will" being the best known example. Physicians in Arkansas who were identified to be currently engaged in general practice, family medicine, or internal medicine, including its subspecialities (N = 1293), were surveyed to assess attitudes toward and experiences with advance directives. Almost 80% of all respondents expressed a positive attitude and fewer than 2% expressed a negative attitude toward such documents. A majority (55.9%) had actual experience with the instruments in their practices, and 83.5% of these physicians said that their attitude had become more positive as a result of their experience. More frequent employment of advance directives in critical situations was associated with more positive attitudes and experiences. Most of the benefits claimed for advance directives--improved communication and trust, easier and more confident treatment decision, less stress and guilt, and promotion of patient autonomy--were substantiated by the results.     

How strictly do dialysis patients want their advance directives followed?

OBJECTIVE--The Cruzan case and the Patient Self-Determination Act will encourage patients to specify in advance which life-sustaining treatments they would want if they become mentally incompetent. However, strictly following such advance directives may not always be in a patient's best interests. We sought to determine whether patients differ in how strictly they want advance directives followed. DESIGN--Interview study. SETTING--Seven outpatient chronic dialysis centers. PARTICIPANTS--One hundred fifty mentally competent dialysis patients. INTERVENTION--Using a structured questionnaire, we asked the subjects whether they would want dialysis continued or stopped if they developed advanced Alzheimer's disease. We then asked how much leeway their physician and surrogate should have to override that advance directive if overriding were in their best interests. Subjects granting leeway were also asked what factors should be considered in making decisions for them. RESULTS--Subjects varied greatly in how much leeway they would give surrogates to override their advance directives: "no leeway" (39%), "a little leeway" (19%), "a lot of leeway" (11%), and "complete leeway" (31%). Subjects also varied in how much they wanted various factors considered in making decisions, such as pain or suffering, quality of life, possibility of a new treatment, indignity caused by continued treatment, financial impact of treatment on family members, and religious beliefs. CONCLUSIONS--Strictly following all advance directives may not truly reflect patients' preferences. To improve advance directives, we recommend that physicians explicitly ask patients how strictly they want their advance directives followed and what factors they want considered in making decisions.     

End-of-life discussions and preferences among persons with HIV

CONTEXT: Deficits in advance care planning leave many patients and their physicians unprepared for decisions about end-of-life care. Even though the prognosis has improved for many persons with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection, a need for planning remains. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate prevalence of end-of-life discussions, use of advance directives, and preferences concerning end-of-life care and their relationship with patient demographics, clinical status, psychosocial variables, and practitioner characteristics among HIV-infected persons. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Cross-sectional survey of a US probability sample of 2864, which represents 231 400 adults receiving care for HIV, conducted from January 1996 to April 1997. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Communication with physician regarding end-of-life issues, completion of an advance directive, preference for aggressiveness of care, and willingness to tolerate future permanent adverse health states. RESULTS: A total of 1432 patients (50%) discussed some aspect of end-of-life care with their practitioner and 1088 (38%) completed an advance directive. Patients were more likely to complete an advance directive after a physician discussion (odds ratio [OR], 5.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.50-7.52). Practitioners discussed end-of-life care less with blacks (OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.39-0.83) and Latinos (OR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.55-0.98) than with whites. Women (OR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.05-1.84) and patients with children in the household (OR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.12-2.10) communicated the most with practitioners about end-of-life issues. Patients infected with HIV via injection drug use (OR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.45-0.89) and those with less education communicated the least with physicians about end-of-life issues. Less denial, greater trust in one's practitioner, and longer patient-practitioner relationship were associated with more advance care planning. CONCLUSIONS: Half of all persons infected with HIV are at risk of making end-of-life decisions without prior discussions with their health care practitioners. Blacks, Latinos, intravenous drug users, and less educated individuals need advance care planning interventions in clinical HIV programs.     

Attitudes toward physician-assisted suicide among physicians in Vermont

BACKGROUND: Legislation on physician-assisted suicide (PAS) is being considered in a number of states since the passage of the Oregon Death With Dignity Act in 1994. Opinion assessment surveys have historically assessed particular subsets of physicians. OBJECTIVE: To determine variables predictive of physicians' opinions on PAS in a rural state, Vermont, USA. DESIGN: Cross-sectional mailing survey. PARTICIPANTS: 1052 (48% response rate) physicians licensed by the state of Vermont. RESULTS: Of the respondents, 38.2% believed PAS should be legalised, 16.0% believed it should be prohibited and 26.0% believed it should not be legislated. 15.7% were undecided. Males were more likely than females to favour legalisation (42% vs 34%). Physicians who did not care for patients through the end of life were significantly more likely to favour legalisation of PAS than physicians who do care for patients with terminal illness (48% vs 33%). 30% of the respondents had experienced a request for assistance with suicide. CONCLUSIONS: Vermont physicians' opinions on the legalisation of PAS is sharply polarised. Patient autonomy was a factor strongly associated with opinions in favour of legalisation, whereas the sanctity of the doctor-patient relationship was strongly associated with opinions in favour of not legislating PAS. Those in favour of making PAS illegal overwhelmingly cited moral and ethical beliefs as factors in their opinion. Although opinions on legalisation appear to be based on firmly held beliefs, approximately half of Vermont physicians who responded to the survey agree that there is a need for more education in palliative care and pain management.     

Family consent, communication, and advance directives for cancer disclosure: a Japanese case and discussion.

The dilemma of whether and how to disclose a diagnosis of cancer or of any other terminal illness continues to be a subject of worldwide interest. We present the case of a 62-year-old Japanese woman afflicted with advanced gall bladder cancer who had previously expressed a preference not to be told a diagnosis of cancer. The treating physician revealed the diagnosis to the family first, and then told the patient: "You don't have any cancer yet, but if we don't treat you, it will progress to a cancer". In our analysis, we examine the role of family consent, communication patterns (including ambiguous disclosure), and advance directives for cancer disclosure in Japan. Finally, we explore the implications for Edmund Pellegrino's proposal of "something close to autonomy" as a universal good.     

Alberta Euthanasia Survey: 3-year follow-up.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the opinions of Alberta physicians about active euthanasia had changed and to assess the determinants of potential changes in opinion. DESIGN: Follow-up survey (mailed questionnaire) of physicians included in the 1991 Alberta Euthanasia Survey. SETTING: Alberta. PARTICIPANTS: Of the 1391 physicians who participated in the 1991 survey 1291 (93%) had indicated that they were willing to take part in a follow-up survey. A follow-up questionnaire was mailed in 1994 to 1146 physicians who could be traced through the 1994 Medical Directory of the provincial college of physicians and surgeons; 25 questionnaires were returned because they could not be delivered. OUTCOME MEASURES: Physicians' opinions about (a) the morality of active euthanasia, (b) changes in the law to permit active euthanasia and (c) the practice of legalized euthanasia. RESULTS: Of the 1121 physicians sent a follow-up questionnaire 866 (77%) returned it completed. The responses of these same 866 physicians in 1991 provided a basis for comparison. Of the 866, 360 (42%) stated in the 1994 survey that it is sometimes right to practise active euthanasia; a similar proportion (384 [44%]) gave this response in 1991. However, other opinions changed significantly. In 1991, 250 of the respondents (29%) indicated that they would practise active euthanasia if it were legalized, as compared with 128 (15%) in 1994 (p < 0.01). In 1991, 429 (50%) of the respondents thought that the law should be changed to permit active euthanasia, as compared with 316 (37%) in 1994 (p < 0.01). Religious activity was the most important characteristic associated with changes in opinion. Despite the decrease in support for the practice and legalization of active euthanasia between 1991 and 1994, in both surveys at least 70% of those who responded to this question indicated that active euthanasia, if it were legalized, should be performed only by physicians and should be taught at medical sites. CONCLUSION: Alberta physicians' support for the practice and legalization of active euthanasia decreased considerably between 1991 and 1994. However, most physicians remain in favour of restricting active euthanasia, if it were legalized, to the medical profession. These results suggest a need for caution and deliberation when changes in the law concerning active euthanasia are examined.     

Advance directives and older people: ethical challenges in the promotion of advance directives in New Zealand

In New Zealand an advance directive can be either an oral statement or a written document. Such directives give individuals the opportunity to make choices about future medical treatment in the event they are cognitively impaired or otherwise unable to make their preferences known. All consumers of health care have the right to make an advance directive in accordance with the common law. When we consider New Zealand's rapidly ageing population, the fact that more people now live with and die of chronic rather than acute conditions, the importance given to respecting autonomous decision-making, increasing numbers of individuals who require long-term residential care, and financial pressures in the allocation of medical resources, there would seem to be a number of compelling reasons to encourage individuals to write or verbalize an advance directive. Indeed the promotion of advance directives is encouraged. However, caution should be exercised in promoting advance directives to older people, especially in light of several factors: ageist attitudes and stereotypes towards them, challenges in the primary healthcare setting, and the way in which advance directives are currently focused and formulated. This paper considers some of the specific challenges that need to be addressed if the promotion of advance directives are to improve outcomes of patient treatment and care near the end of life.     

Involvement of nurses in euthanasia: a review of the literature

In ethical debates about euthanasia, the focus is often exclusively on the involvement of physicians and the involvement of nurses is seldom given much attention. Yet nurses occupy a central position in the care of terminal patients, where being confronted with a euthanasia request is an ever present possibility. To assess the involvement of nurses in euthanasia, this article provides an overview of relevant findings from the scientific literature. From this it becomes apparent that nurses are involved in various phases of the euthanasia process: observing the request for euthanasia, decision making, carrying out of euthanasia, and the aftercare for the patient's family members.