Australian Centre for Health Law Research, Faculty of Business and Law, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Faculties of Law and Medicine, Health Law Institute, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Health Expect. 2024 Jun;27(3):e14107. doi: 10.1111/hex.14107.
Assisted dying (AD) has been legalised in a small but growing number of jurisdictions globally, including Canada and Australia. Early research in both countries demonstrates that, in response to access barriers, patients and caregivers take action to influence their individual experience of AD, as well as AD systems more widely. This study analyses how patients and caregivers suggest other decision-makers in AD systems should address identified issues.
We conducted semistructured, qualitative interviews with patients and caregivers seeking AD in Victoria (Australia) and three Canadian provinces (British Columbia, Ontario and Nova Scotia). Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis and codebook template analysis.
Sixty interviews were conducted with 67 participants (65 caregivers, 2 patients). In Victoria, this involved 28 interviews with 33 participants (32 caregivers, 1 patient) about 28 patient experiences. In Canada, this involved 32 interviews with 34 participants (33 caregivers, 1 patient) about 33 patient experiences. We generated six themes, corresponding to six overarching suggestions by patients and caregivers to address identified system issues: (1) improved content and dissemination of information about AD; (2) proactively develop policies and procedures about AD provision; (3) address institutional objection via top-down action; (4) proactively develop grief resources and peer support mechanisms; (5) amend laws to address legal barriers; and (6) engage with and act on patient and caregiver feedback about experiences.
AD systems should monitor and respond to suggestions from patients and caregivers with firsthand experience of AD systems, who are uniquely placed to identify issues and suggestions for improvement. To date, Canada has responded comparatively well to address identified issues, whereas the Victorian government has signalled there are no plans to amend laws to address identified access barriers. This may result in patients and caregivers continuing to take on the burdens of acting to address identified issues.
Patients and caregivers are central to this research. We interviewed patients and caregivers about their experiences of AD, and the article focuses on their suggestions for addressing identified barriers within AD systems. Patient interest groups in Australia and Canada also supported our recruitment process.
安乐死(AD)已在全球少数但不断增多的司法管辖区合法化,包括加拿大和澳大利亚。这两个国家的早期研究表明,为了应对准入障碍,患者和护理人员采取行动,影响他们个人对 AD 的体验,以及更广泛的 AD 系统。本研究分析了患者和护理人员如何建议 AD 系统中的其他决策者解决已确定的问题。
我们在澳大利亚维多利亚州和加拿大三个省份(不列颠哥伦比亚省、安大略省和新斯科舍省)进行了寻求 AD 的患者和护理人员的半结构式定性访谈。使用反思性主题分析和代码本模板分析对数据进行分析。
在维多利亚州,共进行了 28 次访谈,涉及 33 名参与者(32 名护理人员,1 名患者),共涉及 28 名患者的经历。在加拿大,共进行了 32 次访谈,涉及 34 名参与者(33 名护理人员,1 名患者),共涉及 33 名患者的经历。我们生成了六个主题,对应于患者和护理人员提出的六个总体建议,以解决已确定的系统问题:(1)改善关于 AD 的信息的内容和传播;(2)主动制定关于 AD 提供的政策和程序;(3)通过自上而下的行动解决机构反对意见;(4)主动制定悲伤资源和同行支持机制;(5)修订法律以解决法律障碍;(6)参与并对患者和护理人员关于体验的反馈采取行动。
AD 系统应监测并回应有 AD 系统第一手经验的患者和护理人员的建议,他们是唯一能够识别问题和改进建议的人。到目前为止,加拿大相对较好地回应了已确定的问题,而维多利亚州政府表示,没有计划修改法律以解决已确定的准入障碍。这可能导致患者和护理人员继续承担解决已确定问题的负担。
患者和护理人员是这项研究的核心。我们采访了患者和护理人员关于他们的 AD 体验,文章重点介绍了他们解决 AD 系统中已确定障碍的建议。澳大利亚和加拿大的患者利益团体也支持我们的招募过程。