Palliative care improves the quality of life for patients and families facing problems associated with life threatening illnesses.
Articles on End-of-life care
Displaying 61 - 80 of 96 articles
Imagine this situation: a person has no medical illness but wishes to end his or her life purely because he or she no longer wishes to live. Should they be eligible for euthanasia or assisted suicide?
Discussing end-of-life care -helps patients, their families and their healthcare teams plan for the future and end of life care.
During a discussion on Q&A, author Nikki Gemmell said 80% of Australians and up to 70% of Catholics and Anglicans support euthanasia laws. Is that right?
There is a growing body of evidence available on how many people are using euthanasia and assisted dying laws in places where it is legal.
Euthanasia and palliative sedation are categorically distinct, so the notion that we can use the latter to achieve the former is untenable.
It is likely that, ironically, any legalisation of euthanasia in this country will actually hinder the care of those most in need.
Antipsychotic medications for delirium don’t work and could harm, a new study shows. So what options are left?
At least one-third of patients receive non-beneficial treatments at the end of their life. Having a good advance care directive that you share with others helps them know and respect your wishes.
We found one third of patients near the end of their life received non-beneficial treatments in hospitals around the world. These included initiating chemotherapy and providing emergency surgery.
Why have Americans become more receptive to aid in dying, a practice that was rejected throughout the United States until Oregon changed course in 1997?
It is rare to hear from people in their tenth or eleventh decade but their voices are crucial to shaping end-of-life care services.
Palliative care should be a time of shared care; when the doctor continues treating their patient’s disease while symptom control and preparation for death track alongside.
Research shows people who suffer from loss of meaning die earlier than those who maintain purpose. We can help people find meaning again by nurturing their “spirit”.
Let’s consider some of the oft-voiced concerns and whether they’re justified.
Intuitively, we believe offering someone options automatically expands their freedom. But that isn’t always true. Sometimes, more options can lead to less freedom.
People at the end of life may not actually be the best target for expensive drugs.
Despite Australians’ wishes, we spend more on people dying in hospital than enabling them to die at home.
In the past, owners were quick to put their pets down. Now, with many viewing pets as family members, are they waiting too long?
A new Medicare proposal would reimburse doctors for appointments to help patients plan what care they would want if they are too ill to speak for themselves. It’s about time.
Top contributors
-
Distinguished Professor, Professor of End-of-Life Law and Regulation, Australian Centre for Health Law Research, Queensland University of Technology
-
Consultant Neonatologist and Professor of Ethics, University of Oxford
-
Professor of Law, Australian Centre for Health Law Research, Queensland University of Technology
-
Assistant Professor of Palliative Medicine, Aga Khan University
-
Emeritus professor, Southern Cross University
-
Adjunct Research Fellow, Adelaide University
-
Professor of Intensive Care, UNSW
-
Honorary Enterprise Professor, School of Population and Global Health, and Department of General Practice and Primary Care, The University of Melbourne
-
Associate Professor of Law (Health Law), Deakin University
-
Lecturer in Nursing, University of Birmingham
-
Associate professor, Australian Catholic University
-
Associate professor, Queensland University of Technology
-
Professor of Medicine, Monash University
-
Emeritus Professor of Public Health, La Trobe University
-
Associate Professor of Law, Bond University