IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v15y2018i6p1272-d152836.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Taking One’s Own Life in Hospital? Patients and Health Care Professionals Vis-à-Vis the Tension between Assisted Suicide and Suicide Prevention in Switzerland

Author

Listed:
  • Stella Reiter-Theil

    (Department Clinical Ethics, Psychiatric Hospitals of the University Basel (UPK), University Hospital Basel (USB), University Basel, 4002 Basel, Switzerland)

  • Charlotte Wetterauer

    (Department Clinical Ethics, Psychiatric Hospitals of the University Basel (UPK), University Hospital Basel (USB), University Basel, 4002 Basel, Switzerland)

  • Irena Anna Frei

    (Department Nursing and Allied Health Professions, University Hospital Basel, 4031 Basel, Switzerland)

Abstract

In Switzerland, the practice of lay right-to-die societies (RTDS) organizing assisted suicide (AS) is tolerated by the state. Patient counseling and accompaniment into the dying process is overtaken by RTDS lay members, while the role of physicians may be restricted to prescribing the mortal dose after a more or less rigorous exploration of the patient’s decisional capacity. However, Swiss health care facilities and professionals are committed to providing suicide prevention. Despite the liberal attitude in society, the legitimacy of organized AS is ethically questioned. How can health professionals be supported in their moral uncertainty when confronted with patient wishes for suicide? As an approach towards reaching this objective, two ethics policies were developed at the Basel University Hospital to offer orientation in addressing twofold and divergent duties: handling requests for AS and caring for patients with suicidal thoughts or after a suicide attempt. According to the Swiss tradition of “consultation” (“Vernehmlassung”), controversial views were acknowledged in the interdisciplinary policy development processes. Both institutional policies mirror the clash of values and suggest consistent ways to meet the challenges: respect and tolerance regarding a patient’s wish for AS on the one hand, and the determination to offer help and prevent harm by practicing suicide prevention on the other. Given the legal framework lacking specific norms for the practice of RTDS, orientation is sought in ethical guidelines. The comparison between the previous and newly revised guideline of the Swiss Academy of Medical Sciences reveals, in regard to AS, a shift from the medical criterion, end of life is near, to a patient rights focus, i.e., decisional capacity, consistent with the law. Future experience will show whether and how this change will be integrated into clinical practice. In this process, institutional ethics policies may—in addition to the law, national guidelines, or medical standards—be helpful in addressing conflicting duties at the bedside. The article offers an interdisciplinary theoretical reflection with practical illustration.

Suggested Citation

  • Stella Reiter-Theil & Charlotte Wetterauer & Irena Anna Frei, 2018. "Taking One’s Own Life in Hospital? Patients and Health Care Professionals Vis-à-Vis the Tension between Assisted Suicide and Suicide Prevention in Switzerland," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-14, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:15:y:2018:i:6:p:1272-:d:152836
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/15/6/1272/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/15/6/1272/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:15:y:2018:i:6:p:1272-:d:152836. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.