Marie-Eve Bouthillier1, Lucie Opatrny2. 1. Office of Clinical Ethics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada. 2. Ministry of Health and Social Services, Quebec City, QC, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Under Quebec's Act respecting end-of-life care, physicians may refuse to provide medical aid in dying because of personal convictions, also called conscientious objections. Before legalisation, the results of our survey showed that the majority of physicians were in favour of medical aid in dying (76%), but one-third (28%) were not prepared to perform it. After 18 months of legalisation, physicians were refusing far more frequently than the pre-Act survey had anticipated. AIM: To explore the conscientious objections stated by physicians so as to understand why some of them refuse to get involved in their patients' medical aid in dying requests. DESIGN/PARTICIPANTS: An exploratory qualitative study based on semi-structured interviews with 22 physicians who expressed a refusal after they received a request for medical aid in dying. Thematic descriptive analysis was used to analyse physicians' motives for their conscientious objections and the reasons behind it. RESULTS: The majority of physicians who refused to participate did not oppose medical aid in dying. The reason most often cited is not based on moral and religious grounds. Rather, the emotional burden related to this act and the fear of psychological repercussions were the most expressed motivations for not participating in medical aid in dying. CONCLUSION: The originality of this research is based on what the actual perception is of doing medical aid in dying as opposed to merely a conceptual assent. Further explorations are required in order to support policy decisions such as access to better emotional supports for providers and interdisciplinary support.
BACKGROUND: Under Quebec's Act respecting end-of-life care, physicians may refuse to provide medical aid in dying because of personal convictions, also called conscientious objections. Before legalisation, the results of our survey showed that the majority of physicians were in favour of medical aid in dying (76%), but one-third (28%) were not prepared to perform it. After 18 months of legalisation, physicians were refusing far more frequently than the pre-Act survey had anticipated. AIM: To explore the conscientious objections stated by physicians so as to understand why some of them refuse to get involved in their patients' medical aid in dying requests. DESIGN/PARTICIPANTS: An exploratory qualitative study based on semi-structured interviews with 22 physicians who expressed a refusal after they received a request for medical aid in dying. Thematic descriptive analysis was used to analyse physicians' motives for their conscientious objections and the reasons behind it. RESULTS: The majority of physicians who refused to participate did not oppose medical aid in dying. The reason most often cited is not based on moral and religious grounds. Rather, the emotional burden related to this act and the fear of psychological repercussions were the most expressed motivations for not participating in medical aid in dying. CONCLUSION: The originality of this research is based on what the actual perception is of doing medical aid in dying as opposed to merely a conceptual assent. Further explorations are required in order to support policy decisions such as access to better emotional supports for providers and interdisciplinary support.
Entities:
Keywords:
Qualitative research; clinical ethics; euthanasia; medicine; refusal to participate
Authors: Eric G Campbell; Vinay Kini; Julie Ressalam; Bridget S Mosley; Dragana Bolcic-Jankovic; Hillary D Lum; Elizabeth R Kessler; Matthew DeCamp Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2022-01-11 Impact factor: 6.473