The contextual nature of decision making near the end of life: Hospice patients’ perspectives

Abstract

Mr. C. was diagnosed with lung cancer seven months ago. The cancer then spread to his brain. He was fully aware that the physicians were treating his symptoms, not the disease; however, discussions regarding the goals of treatment did not occur. He continued the treatment regimen of chemotherapy and radiation therapy. While at home one evening, he fell and fractured his femur. His mobility and independence were at once greatly compromised. While recovering in the hospital, he made the decision to opt out of curative treatment. He stated, “I want to go home, play with my cat, smoke cigarettes, and be with my friends when they can visit.”

What are the processes by which adults with life-threatening conditions make decisions about their care? What is the context of these decisions? The purpose of this study was to describe the process of decision making for adults with a terminal illness.

Keywords

decision making hospice patients terminal illness

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bottorff JL , Steele R , Davies B , et al. : Striving for balance: palliative care patients’ experiences of making everyday choices. J Palliat Care. 1998; 14: 7-17.

Sahlberg-Blom E , Ternestedt MB , Johansson JE : Patient participation in decision-making at the end of life as seen by a close relative. Nurs Ethics. 2000; 7: 296-313.

Degner LF , Sloan JA : Decision making during serious illness: What role do patients want to play? J Clin Epidemiol. 1992; 45: 941-950.

Fins JJ , Miller FG , Acres CA , et al. : End-of-life decision-making in the hospital: Current practice and future prospects. J Pain Symptom Manage. 1999; 17: 6-15.

Swigart V , Lidz C , Butterworth T , et al. : Letting go: Family decisions to forgo life support. Heart Lung. 1996; 26: 483-494.

Wengraf T : Qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage, 2001.

Lincoln YV , Guba EG : Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage, 1985.

Lofland J , Lofland LH : Analyzing social settings: A guide to qualitative observation and analysis. Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth, 1984.

National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization (NHPCO) : Facts and figures on hospice care in America. Alexandria, Vir., 2001.

10.

Strauss AL : Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987.

11.

Glaser B : Basics of grounded theory analysis. Mill Valley, Calif.: Sociology Press, 1992.

12.

Seidel J : The ethnograph. Salt Lake City: Qualis Research, 1998.

13.

Pierce PF : Deciding on breast cancer treatment: A description of decision behavior. Nurs Res. 1993; 42: 22-28.

14.

Cherny NI , Coyle N , Foley KM : Guidelines in the care of the dying cancer patient. Pain Palliat Care. 1996; 10: 261-286.

15.

Coyle N , Adelhardt J , Foley KM , et al. : Characteristics of terminal illness in the advanced cancer patient: Pain and other symptoms during the last 4 weeks of life. J Pain Symptom Manage. 1990; 5: 83-92.

16.

Kutner JS , Steiner JF , Corbett KK , et al. : Information needs in terminal illness. Soc Sci Med. 1999; 48: 1341-1352.

17.

Murphy P , Kreling B , Kathryn E , et al. : Description of the SUPPORT intervention. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2000; 48: S154-S161.

18.

Barry B , Henderson A : Nature of decision-making in the terminally ill patient. Cancer Nurs. 1996; 19: 384-391.

19.

Greisinger AJ , Lorimor RJ , Aday LA , et al. : Terminally ill cancer patients: Their most important concerns. Cancer Pract. 1997; 5: 147-154.

20.

Pepler CJ , Lynch A : Relational messages of control in nurse-patient interactions with terminally ill patients with AIDS and cancer. J Palliat Care. 1991; 7: 18-29.

21.

Kozak DL : Surrendering to diabetes: An embodied response to perceptions of diabetes and death in the Gila River Indian Community. Omega. 1997; 35: 347-359.

22.

Lyon ML , Barbalet JM : Society’s body and the “somatization” of social theory. In Csordas T (ed.). Embodiment and experience. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994, 48-66.