Doctors are concerned that patients under their care have a good death. Ensuring appropriate care for patients at the end of life often requires discontinuation of treatments which are no longer appropriate Similar challenging decisions and discussions frequently occur around withholding treatments which would provide no benefit to the patient. Frequently doctors and patients need to discuss whether or not cardiopulmonary resuscitation is appropriate, or when access to intensive care may be unrealistic. These conversations at any time, and especially in the context of acute illness, can be challenging and may cause distress to patients and their families leading to complaints where withholding and/or withdrawal of treatment may be perceived as hastening death. Challenges also exist around fulfilling a patient’s wish for their preferred place of death. Many patients wish to die at home, but this may be unrealistic, yet hospice spaces are limited and hospitals can struggle to provide the appropriate environment for the dying patient.
The recognition that death may involve suffering that medicine cannot fully alleviate and occurs at a time and place out with the patient’s control leads many to advocate for assisted suicide. The greater body of professional opinion remains uneasy with such a change in the law amidst fears that any legislation may exploit the vulnerable and change the fundamental role of the doctor. Nonetheless, clarion calls continue to sound.
Join us for our second debate in a series of medico-legal evening meetings where a panel of doctors from Palliative care, Intensive care, Medicine of the elderly will be joined by Mr David Stephenson, QC, Alex Cole Hamilton MSP and Maureen O’Neill, College Lay Representative will discuss legal aspects of end-of-life care and debate whether the law needs to be changed to permit physician assisted suicide.
Dr Conor Maguire
Dr Peter Reid
Dr Kathy Strachan
