Health-care professionals in end-of-life care are frequently confronted with patients who seem to be ‘ambivalent’ about treatment decisions, especially if they express a wish to die. This article investigates this phenomenon by analysing two case stories based on narrative interviews with two patients and their caregivers. First, we argue that a respectful approach to patients requires acknowledging that coexistence of opposing wishes can be part of authentic, multi-layered experiences and moral understandings at the end of life. Second, caregivers need to understand when contradictory statements point to tensions in a patient’s moral experience that require support. Third, caregivers should be careful not to negatively label or even pathologize seemingly contradictory patient statements.
FrankAW. The wounded storyteller. Body, illness and ethics. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press, 1995.
2.
GlaserBGStraussAL. The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago, IL: Aldine, 1967.
3.
SmithJFlowersPLarkinM. Interpretive phenomenological analysis. Theory, method and research. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE, 2009.
4.
Rehmann-SutterCPorzRScullyJL. How to relate the empirical to the normative. Towards a phenomenologically-informed hermeneutic approach to bioethics. Camb Q Healthc Ethics, in press.
5.
ArnoldR. Ambivalence and ambiguity in hospitalized, critically ill patients and its relevance for palliative care. J Palliat Med2000; 3: 17–22.
6.
FriedTRO’LearyJVan NessPInconsistency over time in the preferences of older persons with advanced illness for life-sustaining treatment. J Am Geriatr Soc2007; 55: 1007–1014.
7.
PatersonBL. The shifting perspective model of chronic illness. J Nurs Scholarsh2001; 1: 21–26.
8.
RosenfeldKEWengerNSPhillipsRSFactors associated with change in resuscitation preferences of seriously ill patients. The SUPPORT Investigators. Study to understand prognoses and preferences for outcomes and risks of treatments. Arch Intern Med1996; 156: 1558–1564.
9.
CarmelSMutranEJ. Stability of elderly persons’ expressed preferences regarding the use of life-sustaining treatments. Soc Sci Med1999; 49(3): 303–311.
10.
StratonJBWangNYMeoniLAPhysical functioning, depression, and preferences for treatment at the end of life: the Johns Hopkins Precursors Study. J Am Geriatr Soc2004; 52: 577–582.
11.
WittinkMNMoralesKHMeoniLAStability of preferences of end-of-life treatment after 3 years of follow-up. Arch Intern Med2008; 168(19): 2125–2130.
12.
EmanuelEFFaircloughDLEmanuelLL. Attitudes and desires related to euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide among terminally ill patients and their caregivers. JAMA2000; 284: 2460–2468.
13.
ChochinovHMWilsonKGEnnsMDesire for death in the terminally ill. Am J Psychiatry1995; 152: 1185–1191.
14.
JohansenSHølenJCKaasSAttitudes towards, and wishes for, euthanasia in advanced cancer patients at a palliative medicine unit. Palliat Med2005; 19: 454–460.
15.
ChunlestskulKCarlsonLKoopmansJLived experiences of Canadian women with metastatic breast cancer in preparation for their death. Part II. J Palliat Care2008; 24(1): 16–25.
16.
CoyleNSculcoL. Expressed desire for hastened death in seven patients living with advanced cancer: a phenomenologic inquiry. Oncol Nurs Forum2004; 31(4): 699–706.
17.
GunaratnamY. Narrative interviews and research. In: GunaratnamYOliviereD (eds) Narrative and stories in health care. Illness stories and bereavement. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009, pp.47–61.
18.
HeideggerM. Sein und Zeit (Being and time). Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag, 1927.
19.
GadamerHG. Wahrheit und Methode (Truth and method). Tübingen: Mohr, 1960.
20.
WalkerMU. Moral understandings: a feminist study in ethics. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2007.
21.
TaylorC. The sources of the self: the making of modern identity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1989.
22.
PaleyJ. Narrative machinery. In: GunaratnamYOliviereD (eds) Narrative stories in health care. Illness, dying, and bereavement. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009, pp.17–32.
23.
LindemannNH. Damaged identities, narrative repair. New York: Cornell University Press, 2001.
24.
HardwigJ. Autobiography, biography and narrative ethics. In: LindemannNH (ed.) Stories and their limits. Narrative approaches to bioethics. New York: Routledge, 1997, pp.50–64.
25.
HakerH. Narrative bioethik (Narrative bioethics). In: GraumannSGrüberK (eds) Anerkennung, Ethik und Behinderung. Beiträge aus dem Institut Mensch Ethik und Wissenschaft (Recognition, ethics and disability. Articles of the Institute Man Ethics and Science). Berlin: LIT Verlag Münster, 2005, Vol. 2, pp.113–132.
26.
WaldvogelB. Ambivalenz (Ambivalence). In: MertensWWaldvogelB (eds) Handbuch der psychoanalytischen Grundbegriffe(Manual of basic terms of psychoanalysis). Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2008, pp.56–62.
27.
OhnsorgeKRehmann-SutterC. Menschen, die sterben möchten. Empirische Studien in der Palliativmedizin und ihre ethischen Implikationen (Persons who want to die. Empirical studies in palliative medicine and their ethical implications). In: HiltAJordanI andFrewerA (eds) Endlichkeit, Medizin und Unsterblichkeit (Finitude, medicine and immortality). Stuttgart: Steiner, 2010, pp.249–270.
28.
WiddershovenG. Interpretation and dialogue in hermeneutic ethics. In: AshcroftRLucassenA, ParkerM (eds) Case analysis in clinical ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005, pp.57–75.
29.
WiddershovenG. Identity and development. A narrative perspective. In: BosmaHGraafsmaTGrotevantH (eds) Identity and development: an interdisciplinary approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 1994, Vol. 172, pp.3–117.
