Objectives—The study was performed in order to investigate how end-of-life decisions are influenced by cultural and sociopolitical circumstances and to explore the compliance of doctors with patient wishesParticipants and measurement—Five hundred and thirty-five physicians were surveyed in Sweden , Germany , and in Russia by a questionnaire. The participants were recruited according to availability and are not representative. The questionnaire is based on the one developed by Molloy and co-workers in Canada which contains three case vignettes about an 82-year-old Alzheimer (...) patient with an acute life-threatening condition; the questionnaire includes different levels of information about his treatment wishes. We have added various questions about attitudes determining doctors' decision making process .Results—Swedish physicians chose fewer life-prolonging interventions as compared with the Russian and the German doctors. Swedish physicians would perform cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the event of a cardiac arrest less frequently, followed by the German doctors. More than half the Russian physicians decided to perform CPR irrespective of the available information about the patient's wishes. Level of dementia emerged as the most powerful determining attitude-variable for the decision making in all three countries.Conclusions—The lack of compliance with patient wishes among a substantial number of doctors points to the necessity of emphasising ethical aspects both in medical education and clinical practice. The inconsistency in the treatment decisions of doctors from different countries calls for social consensus in this matter. (shrink)

It is commonly believed thatgeriatric medicine generates a distinctive setof ethical problems. Implicated are such issuesas resource allocation, competence and consent,advance directives, medical futility anddeliberate death. It is also argued that itwould be unjust to allow the elderly to competewith younger populations for expensive andscarce health care resources because theelderly “have already lived,” and that treatingthem the same as these other populations woulddiminish the available resources unfairly,prolong a life of inevitably failing health andresult in increased health care expenditures.In fact, however, (...) this perception of ethicaluniqueness is mistaken. Differences in medicalconditions, demographics and aetiology shouldnot be allowed to obscure the fact that ethicalissues in geriatric medicine are essentiallythe same as those faced in any other area ofhealth care, and that the solutions that areadopted in the geriatric context must beconsistent with the ethical principles that arefollowed elsewhere. The paper argues that theroot of the mistaken perception lies in theabandonment of the Hippocratic mandate ofmedicine and in an unreflective adherence tothe belief that medical advances are inevitablybeneficial. It is suggested that a return topatient-centred medicine and the use of ethicsimpact analyses before introducing medicaladvances may be ethically appropriate. (shrink)