A case study of Muslims' perspectives of expanded terminal sedation:addressing the elephant in the room.

IF 3 1区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS BMC Medical Ethics Pub Date : 2024-11-21 DOI:10.1186/s12910-024-01110-3
Elham H Othman, Mohammad R AlOsta
{"title":"A case study of Muslims' perspectives of expanded terminal sedation:addressing the elephant in the room.","authors":"Elham H Othman, Mohammad R AlOsta","doi":"10.1186/s12910-024-01110-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Recently, the concept of expanded terminal sedation emerged to describe using sedation at the end of life in cases beyond the usual use. Using this sedation could be a stressful ethical encounter for healthcare providers.</p><p><strong>Case: </strong>In this paper, we describe a case of a Muslim palliative care nurse who cared for a patient with cancer who requested expanded terminal sedation. The palliative care nurse described that his initial response to the expanded terminal sedation order was refusing to start the sedation because he believed the patient was not terminally ill and was concerned about killing him, which is prohibited according to his religious beliefs. Further, the nurse perceived the patient's psychological distress and his verbalization of wishing to die peacefully as a concealed request for euthanasia, especially since he was not imminently dying. Finally, the nurse reported being frustrated and uncertain about the care, especially since he did not receive appropriate psychological counseling from professional personnel.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>any case beyond the usual conditions for terminal sedation should be carefully examined, especially when nurses' religious beliefs or moral values contradict it. If sedation should be administered, adequate preparation of healthcare providers should be arranged, including discussing with them the goals of care and the rationale for sedation before and after initiating it. Generating a policy for conscientious objections, allowing nurses to express their own emotions and concerns in a supportive environment are suggested approaches to preserve their wellness.</p>","PeriodicalId":55348,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Ethics","volume":"25 1","pages":"136"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-024-01110-3","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Recently, the concept of expanded terminal sedation emerged to describe using sedation at the end of life in cases beyond the usual use. Using this sedation could be a stressful ethical encounter for healthcare providers.

Case: In this paper, we describe a case of a Muslim palliative care nurse who cared for a patient with cancer who requested expanded terminal sedation. The palliative care nurse described that his initial response to the expanded terminal sedation order was refusing to start the sedation because he believed the patient was not terminally ill and was concerned about killing him, which is prohibited according to his religious beliefs. Further, the nurse perceived the patient's psychological distress and his verbalization of wishing to die peacefully as a concealed request for euthanasia, especially since he was not imminently dying. Finally, the nurse reported being frustrated and uncertain about the care, especially since he did not receive appropriate psychological counseling from professional personnel.

Conclusions: any case beyond the usual conditions for terminal sedation should be carefully examined, especially when nurses' religious beliefs or moral values contradict it. If sedation should be administered, adequate preparation of healthcare providers should be arranged, including discussing with them the goals of care and the rationale for sedation before and after initiating it. Generating a policy for conscientious objections, allowing nurses to express their own emotions and concerns in a supportive environment are suggested approaches to preserve their wellness.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
关于穆斯林对扩大临终镇静的看法的案例研究:解决房间里的大象问题。
背景:最近,出现了 "扩大临终镇静 "的概念,用来描述在生命末期使用镇静的情况,而不是通常使用的镇静。案例:在本文中,我们描述了一名穆斯林姑息治疗护士护理一名要求使用扩大临终镇静剂的癌症患者的案例。据姑息治疗护士描述,他对扩大临终镇静令的最初反应是拒绝开始镇静,因为他认为病人并非病入膏肓,并担心会杀死病人,而这是他的宗教信仰所禁止的。此外,护士认为病人的心理痛苦和他希望平静地死去的口头表达是一种隐蔽的安乐死请求,尤其是他并不是濒临死亡。最后,护士表示对护理工作感到沮丧和不确定,特别是因为他没有得到专业人员的适当心理辅导。结论:任何超出临终镇静常规条件的病例都应仔细研究,特别是当护士的宗教信仰或道德价值观与之相矛盾时。如果要使用镇静剂,应安排医护人员做好充分准备,包括在开始使用镇静剂前后与他们讨论护理目标和镇静剂的理由。建议制定良心反对政策,允许护士在支持性环境中表达自己的情感和担忧,以维护她们的健康。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Medical Ethics
BMC Medical Ethics MEDICAL ETHICS-
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
7.40%
发文量
108
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Medical Ethics is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in relation to the ethical aspects of biomedical research and clinical practice, including professional choices and conduct, medical technologies, healthcare systems and health policies.
期刊最新文献
A case study of Muslims' perspectives of expanded terminal sedation:addressing the elephant in the room. Ethical issues in vaccine trial participation by adolescents: qualitative insights on family decision making from a human papillomavirus vaccine trial in Tanzania. Scoping review and thematic analysis of informed consent in humanitarian emergencies. Healthcare workers' opinions on non-medical criteria for prioritisation of access to care during the pandemic. "I think all of us should have […] much better training in ethics." Ethical challenges in policy making during the COVID-19 pandemic: Results from an interview study with Swiss policy makers and scientists.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1