In many industrialized countries ethicists and lawyers favour advance directives as a tool to guarantee patient autonomy in end-of-life-decisions. However, most citizens seem reluctant to adopt the practice; the number of patients who have an advance directive is low across most countries. The article discusses the key argument for seeing such documents as an instrument of self-interpretation and life-planning, which ultimately have to be interpreted by third parties as well. Interpretation by third parties and the process of self-reflection are conceptually (...) linked by a qualitative concept of identity. Identity is conceived here as constructed in a processual dialogue between a personal and a cultural perspective. How the cultural dimension comes into play in understanding the motivation, rejection or content of wished for end-of-life-decisions, is shown by a brief review of empirical and cultural studies. Understanding advance directives as a culturally embedded tool of self-interpretation should help to overcome urgent moral problems in clinical settings: how to interpret such documents, how to deliberate on the content and on the best form. (shrink)

Die Verbindlichkeit von Patientenverfügungen (PV) wird kontrovers diskutiert. Dabei ist nicht bekannt, wie verbindlich PV von denen gewollt sind, die sie verfassen. Mit Hilfe eines anonymen Fragebogens wurden Verfasser von PV in bayerischen Palliativeinrichtungen und Beratungsstellen hierzu befragt. Von den 402 Befragten gaben 69,1% an, dass ihre PV auch für Bevollmächtigte und Betreuer strikt verbindlich sein soll. Demgegenüber räumten 23,9% ihrem Stellvertreter ein, von der PV abzuweichen. Die lebensbedrohlich Erkrankten unter den Befragten legten nicht weniger, sondern signifikant mehr Wert auf (...) hohe Verbindlichkeit. Für den Fall, dass die PV nicht anwendbar sein sollte, wünschen deren Verfasser eine Entscheidung durch ihren Vertreter. Abgelehnt wird die richterliche Entscheidung bei Dissens. (shrink)

Background: Clinical ethics consultation services have been established in many countries during recent decades. An important task is to discuss concrete clinical cases. However, empirical research observing what is happening during such deliberations is scarce. Objectives: To explore clinical ethics committees’ deliberations and to identify areas for improvement. Design: A pilot study including observations of committees deliberating a paper case, semistructured group interviews, and qualitative analysis of the data. Participants: Nine hospital ethics committees in Norway. Results and interpretations: Key elements (...) of the deliberations included identifying the ethical problems; exploring moral values and principles; clarifying key concepts and relevant legal regulation; exploring medical facts, the patient’s situation, the therapists’ perspective, analogous clinical situations, professional uncertainties, the patient’s and relatives’ perspective, and clinical communication; identifying the involved parties and how to involve them; identifying possible courses of action, and possible conclusion and follow-up. The various elements were closely interwoven. The content and conclusions varied and seemed to be contingent on the committee members’ interpretations, experience and knowledge. Important aspects of a clinical ethics deliberation were sometimes neglected. When the committees used a deliberation procedure and a blackboard, the deliberations tended to become more systematic and transparent. Many of the committees were insecure about how to include the involved parties and how to document the deliberations. Conclusion: Clinical ethics committees may provide an important arena for multidisciplinary discussions of complex clinical ethics challenges. However, this seems to require adequate composition, adoption of transparent deliberation procedures, and targeted training. (shrink)