缓和镇静:自主、痛苦和安乐死。

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care Pub Date : 2023-09-01 DOI:10.1097/SPC.0000000000000665
Ben Colburn, Bridget Johnston
{"title":"缓和镇静:自主、痛苦和安乐死。","authors":"Ben Colburn,&nbsp;Bridget Johnston","doi":"10.1097/SPC.0000000000000665","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>This contemporary and novel review of palliative sedation explores some of the distinctive ethical problems associated with that intervention. It is timely in light of recent reviews of palliative care guidelines on the topic and given the current public debates around the related but distinct practice of euthanasia.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>The main themes discussed are patient autonomy, the nature of suffering and how to alleviate it, and the relationship between palliative sedation and euthanasia.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>First, palliative sedation poses a significant problem for patient autonomy, both in terms of securing informed consent and in terms of the ongoing effect on individual well-being. Second, as an intervention to alleviate suffering, it is appropriate only in limited cases and counterproductive in others, for example, where an individual values their ongoing psychological or social agency more than the relief of pain or negative experience. Third, people's ethical views about palliative sedation are often coloured by their understanding of the legal and moral status of assisted dying and euthanasia; this is unhelpful and occludes the interesting and urgent ethical questions raised by palliative sedation as a distinct end-of-life intervention.</p>","PeriodicalId":48837,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Palliative sedation: autonomy, suffering, and euthanasia.\",\"authors\":\"Ben Colburn,&nbsp;Bridget Johnston\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/SPC.0000000000000665\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>This contemporary and novel review of palliative sedation explores some of the distinctive ethical problems associated with that intervention. It is timely in light of recent reviews of palliative care guidelines on the topic and given the current public debates around the related but distinct practice of euthanasia.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>The main themes discussed are patient autonomy, the nature of suffering and how to alleviate it, and the relationship between palliative sedation and euthanasia.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>First, palliative sedation poses a significant problem for patient autonomy, both in terms of securing informed consent and in terms of the ongoing effect on individual well-being. Second, as an intervention to alleviate suffering, it is appropriate only in limited cases and counterproductive in others, for example, where an individual values their ongoing psychological or social agency more than the relief of pain or negative experience. Third, people's ethical views about palliative sedation are often coloured by their understanding of the legal and moral status of assisted dying and euthanasia; this is unhelpful and occludes the interesting and urgent ethical questions raised by palliative sedation as a distinct end-of-life intervention.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48837,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/SPC.0000000000000665\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SPC.0000000000000665","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

综述目的:这篇关于姑息性镇静的当代新综述探讨了与该干预相关的一些独特的伦理问题。鉴于最近对这一主题的姑息治疗指南的审查,以及目前围绕安乐死相关但独特的实践的公开辩论,这是及时的。最近的发现:讨论的主题是病人的自主权,痛苦的本质和如何减轻痛苦,以及姑息性镇静和安乐死之间的关系。摘要:首先,姑息性镇静对患者的自主性提出了一个重大问题,无论是在确保知情同意方面,还是在对个人福祉的持续影响方面。其次,作为一种减轻痛苦的干预,它只在有限的情况下是合适的,在其他情况下会适得其反,例如,当一个人更重视他们正在进行的心理或社会代理,而不是减轻痛苦或负面经历。第三,人们对缓和镇静的伦理观点往往受到他们对辅助死亡和安乐死的法律和道德地位的理解的影响;这是无益的,并且掩盖了姑息性镇静作为一种独特的临终干预所提出的有趣和紧迫的伦理问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Palliative sedation: autonomy, suffering, and euthanasia.

Purpose of review: This contemporary and novel review of palliative sedation explores some of the distinctive ethical problems associated with that intervention. It is timely in light of recent reviews of palliative care guidelines on the topic and given the current public debates around the related but distinct practice of euthanasia.

Recent findings: The main themes discussed are patient autonomy, the nature of suffering and how to alleviate it, and the relationship between palliative sedation and euthanasia.

Summary: First, palliative sedation poses a significant problem for patient autonomy, both in terms of securing informed consent and in terms of the ongoing effect on individual well-being. Second, as an intervention to alleviate suffering, it is appropriate only in limited cases and counterproductive in others, for example, where an individual values their ongoing psychological or social agency more than the relief of pain or negative experience. Third, people's ethical views about palliative sedation are often coloured by their understanding of the legal and moral status of assisted dying and euthanasia; this is unhelpful and occludes the interesting and urgent ethical questions raised by palliative sedation as a distinct end-of-life intervention.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care
Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
54
期刊介绍: A reader-friendly resource, Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care provides an up-to-date account of the most important advances in the field of supportive and palliative care. Each issue contains either two or three sections delivering a diverse and comprehensive coverage of all the key issues, including end-of-life management, gastrointestinal systems and respiratory problems. Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care is an indispensable journal for the busy clinician, researcher or student.
期刊最新文献
Advances in breathlessness support services for people with serious illness. Bridging the care gap: radiation therapy in elderly and frail cancer patients. The gut microbiome and the brain. Is there a role for capsaicin in Cancer pain management? Comparing the EORTC QLQ-LC13, EORTC QLQ-LC29, and the FACT-L for assessment of quality of life in patients with lung cancer - an updated systematic review.
×
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