Page 19 - Delaware Medical Journal - July-August 2018
P. 19
OPINION
The mean (average) age of responders was 61. Of those identifying their primary specialty, the top three were from family medicine, internal medicine, and nephrology.
Because MSD believes more work can be done to improve end-of-life care through increased utilization of hospice and palliative care programs, we asked the question of our members available. Although 38% of responders said they believed
and facilities available in Delaware, there still seemed to be
hospice services in the state, as indicated by approximately 37% of the respondents.
There are currently legal ways to hasten death, and it was heartening to see that 89% responded that they were aware of those legal ways to do so (e.g., withdrawal of life support, voluntary stopping of eating/drinking [VSED], palliative sedation).
On the question, “Do you support the legalization of physician aid-in-dying by providing a standardized lethal dose prescription?”, the majority of our survey responders did not support legalization (54% vs 38%). Through a cross-tab analysis of those who responded positively to this question in support
of physician aid-in-dying, almost 21% of those respondents indicated they would not be willing to provide a prescription for a patient for this purpose and almost 19% answered they were unsure if they would do so. Twenty-seven percent of these respondents would not be willing to undergo training/ that there are those who support PAS in concept, but would not want to participate. It is also interesting to note that our results to this question are reverse to the percentages seen through surveys from other medical societies recently.
When asked whether the physician would be willing to provide a prescription to a patient for this purpose, with more than
a 2:1 ratio, respondents indicated they would not be willing
to participate in PAS by providing a lethal prescription. This has been seen in states where PAS is legal, resulting in some Clearly, this would be problematic.
It is important to note that the smaller group willing to provide a lethal prescription would also be willing to undergo training/
While there are clearly very good and intelligent people on both sides of this issue, the differences in the conclusions reached by each side create a schism that is both deep and wide.
to the process should PAS become legal.
majority and supported the current MSD position of opposition (almost 59%). However, it is important to also note the
The response to this survey on PAS, though less than ideal, provides important guidance for MSD, and we are grateful to
all who took the time to respond to this important survey on PAS. MSD remains committed to its members and the people of Delaware to advocate for improving end-of-life care in our state. We know this is a controversial issue and, although there is an to clearly listen to and understand the diverse opinions of our membership.
of life. It is our opinion that interdisciplinary intervention
— including specialty consultation, spiritual care, family counseling, as well as increased use of hospice and palliative care services — should be our next step. However, on the and re-evaluate our position as the circumstances and evidence warrant.
In keeping with the spirit of transparency that has been at
the core of MSD discussions on this issue, I have personally discussed the results of our survey on PAS with Rep. Baumbach, the primary sponsor of the End of Life Options bill (HB 160) in the legislature. I also expressed to him a commitment by MSD to work with him to ensure that the citizens of our state have access to the most robust palliative care services that can be provided.
Del Med J | July/August 2018 | Vol. 90 | No. 6
191
