Reflections on the relational ontology of medical assistance in dying.

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q1 NURSING Nursing Philosophy Pub Date : 2023-10-01 Epub Date: 2023-04-09 DOI:10.1111/nup.12438
Barbara Pesut, Sally Thorne
{"title":"Reflections on the relational ontology of medical assistance in dying.","authors":"Barbara Pesut,&nbsp;Sally Thorne","doi":"10.1111/nup.12438","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Canadian nursing practice has been profoundly influenced by the legalization of medical assistance in dying in 2016, requiring that nurses navigate new and sometimes highly challenging experiences. Findings from our longitudinal studies of nurses' experiences suggest that these include deep emotional responses to medical assistance in dying, an urgency in orchestrating the perfect death, and a high degree of relational impact, both professionally and personally. Here we propose a theoretical explanation for these experiences based upon a relational ontology. Drawing upon the work of Wildman, we understand a relational ontology to be one in which relationships are more fundamentally central than the conceptual entities that provide the context to practice. It is in a relationship that conceptual entities, and their affiliated values, are created and recreated. Seen as causal, relationships have ontological status, with important implications for how we consider the concepts of death, suffering, and time in this context. From a conceptual perspective, suffering is primarily self-defined based upon personal histories, time reflects the potential remaining until death, and death is primarily biological and amoral, although social discourses of a good and bad death surround the death trajectory. However, within a relational ontology of medical assistance in dying, these understandings shift. Death becomes primarily social rather than biological, suffering is shared, and time until death is now clearly delimited. Accordingly, nurses assume a profound responsibility for influencing outcomes that are authentically person-centered. These understandings provide important insights into nurses' experiences, enabling us to recognize the causal effects, both intended and unintended, of nurses' relational practices amidst the complexities of assisted death. Drawing on such a perspective, we find implications for how we provide spaces for nurses to reflect on, and have conversations about, their experiences with some of the greatest mysteries of life-death, suffering, and time.</p>","PeriodicalId":49724,"journal":{"name":"Nursing Philosophy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nursing Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/nup.12438","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/4/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Canadian nursing practice has been profoundly influenced by the legalization of medical assistance in dying in 2016, requiring that nurses navigate new and sometimes highly challenging experiences. Findings from our longitudinal studies of nurses' experiences suggest that these include deep emotional responses to medical assistance in dying, an urgency in orchestrating the perfect death, and a high degree of relational impact, both professionally and personally. Here we propose a theoretical explanation for these experiences based upon a relational ontology. Drawing upon the work of Wildman, we understand a relational ontology to be one in which relationships are more fundamentally central than the conceptual entities that provide the context to practice. It is in a relationship that conceptual entities, and their affiliated values, are created and recreated. Seen as causal, relationships have ontological status, with important implications for how we consider the concepts of death, suffering, and time in this context. From a conceptual perspective, suffering is primarily self-defined based upon personal histories, time reflects the potential remaining until death, and death is primarily biological and amoral, although social discourses of a good and bad death surround the death trajectory. However, within a relational ontology of medical assistance in dying, these understandings shift. Death becomes primarily social rather than biological, suffering is shared, and time until death is now clearly delimited. Accordingly, nurses assume a profound responsibility for influencing outcomes that are authentically person-centered. These understandings provide important insights into nurses' experiences, enabling us to recognize the causal effects, both intended and unintended, of nurses' relational practices amidst the complexities of assisted death. Drawing on such a perspective, we find implications for how we provide spaces for nurses to reflect on, and have conversations about, their experiences with some of the greatest mysteries of life-death, suffering, and time.

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
对临终医疗救助关系本体论的思考。
加拿大的护理实践深受2016年死亡医疗援助合法化的影响,这要求护士掌握新的、有时极具挑战性的经验。我们对护士经历的纵向研究结果表明,这些经历包括对临终医疗救助的深刻情感反应、策划完美死亡的紧迫性,以及职业和个人的高度关系影响。在这里,我们提出了一个基于关系本体论的对这些经历的理论解释。根据Wildman的工作,我们将关系本体理解为关系比为实践提供上下文的概念实体更为重要。正是在一种关系中,概念实体及其附属值被创建和重新创建。关系被视为因果关系,具有本体论地位,对我们如何在这种背景下看待死亡、痛苦和时间的概念具有重要意义。从概念的角度来看,痛苦主要是基于个人历史的自我定义,时间反映了直到死亡的潜力,死亡主要是生物的和非道德的,尽管关于好的和坏的死亡的社会话语围绕着死亡轨迹。然而,在死亡医疗救助的关系本体论中,这些理解发生了转变。死亡主要是社会性的,而不是生物性的,痛苦是共同的,直到死亡的时间现在已经明确界定。因此,护士承担着影响真正以人为中心的结果的重大责任。这些理解为护士的经历提供了重要的见解,使我们能够认识到护士在辅助死亡的复杂性中的关系实践的因果影响,无论是有意的还是无意的。基于这样一个视角,我们发现了我们如何为护士提供空间,让他们反思和对话他们的经历,以及生与死、痛苦和时间的一些最大谜团。
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
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
9.10%
发文量
39
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Nursing Philosophy provides a forum for discussion of philosophical issues in nursing. These focus on questions relating to the nature of nursing and to the phenomena of key relevance to it. For example, any understanding of what nursing is presupposes some conception of just what nurses are trying to do when they nurse. But what are the ends of nursing? Are they to promote health, prevent disease, promote well-being, enhance autonomy, relieve suffering, or some combination of these? How are these ends are to be met? What kind of knowledge is needed in order to nurse? Practical, theoretical, aesthetic, moral, political, ''intuitive'' or some other? Papers that explore other aspects of philosophical enquiry and analysis of relevance to nursing (and any other healthcare or social care activity) are also welcome and might include, but not be limited to, critical discussions of the work of nurse theorists who have advanced philosophical claims (e.g., Benner, Benner and Wrubel, Carper, Schrok, Watson, Parse and so on) as well as critical engagement with philosophers (e.g., Heidegger, Husserl, Kuhn, Polanyi, Taylor, MacIntyre and so on) whose work informs health care in general and nursing in particular.
期刊最新文献
Building a Pluriverse of Nursologies: A paradigm for decolonial theory and knowledge development in nursing. Occupational Health Nursing models and theories: A critical analysis in the scope of the unitary-transformative perspective. Opening of the annual special collection: 26th International Nursing Philosophy Conference proceedings in association with IPONS: Re-imagining a nursing ecosystem in an uncertain world. A philosophical exploration of rural health and nursing based on an undergraduate United States-Australian collaboration through the lens of 'positionality'. Reframing covenant for nursing: From individual commitments to covenant with society.
×
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