Attunement and alignment of people with schizophrenia and their preferred alternative decision-makers: An exploratory pilot study comparing treatment and research decisions

Mapping the ethical aspects in end-of-life care for persons with a severe and persistent mental illness: A scoping review of the literature

Persons with severe and persistent mental illness (SPMI) make up a vulnerable group within mental healthcare and society. Not only do they suffer from long-term, serious psychiatric disorders; they often also experience considerable problems in their psychosocial functioning. Research has disclosed that the care needs of this target group are complex, and that the life expectancy of these persons is significantly lower than in the general population. Given (1) the lower life expectancy of persons with SPMI, (2) the higher suicide risk related to mental disorders, and (3) the legalization and practice of medical assistance in dying in an increasing number of countries, it is of utmost importance to map the ethical aspects and challenges of end-of-life care needs in persons with SPMI. Therefore, we charted the way end-of-life care is provided for them by means of a scoping review of the scientific literature, with an emphasis on the ethical aspects surrounding it. We explore existing ethical dilemmas; the underlying ethical values, principles and attitudes; and the locus and stakeholders of ethical dialog regarding end-of-life care in persons with SPMI. The results indicate that the four guiding principles of biomedical ethics can well be identified in the literature, and are each addressed in their own specific way: Autonomy in relation to questions regarding the decision-making capacity of persons with SPMI; Justice in relation to access to quality care and the presence of stigma; and Non-maleficence and Beneficence in relation to the ongoing debate regarding the benefits and obstacles in applying palliative care approaches in the context of psychiatry, and the status of the futility-concept therein. Personal virtues and attitudes in care professionals, like compassion, non-abandonment and upholding dignity are key, as care professionals are the main advocates of persons with SPMI, which often lack an extensive social network. Further, we find that the ethical dialog is mainly focused on care professionals and relatives, rather than the persons with SPMI themselves. This is reflected in the existing research that often had the voices of the latter missing. Future research may benefit from the inclusion of persons with SMPI’s first-hand accounts. End-of-life care for persons with SPMI may benefit from identifying and integrating (locally developed) good practices like cross-sectoral education, specific care models, and ethics support.

Attitudes of legal guardians and legally supervised persons with and without previous research experience towards participation in research projects: A quantitative cross-sectional study

Background

Vulnerable groups, e.g. persons with mental illness, neurological deficits or dementia, are often excluded as participants from research projects because obtaining informed consent can be difficult and tedious. This may have the consequence that vulnerable groups benefit less from medical progress. Vulnerable persons are often supported by a legal guardian in one or more demands of their daily life. We examined the attitudes of legal guardians and legally supervised persons towards medical research and the conditions and motivations to participate in studies.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional study with standardized surveys of legal guardians and legally supervised persons. Two separate questionnaires were developed for the legal guardians and the supervised persons to asses previous experiences with research projects and the reasons for participation or non-participation. The legal guardians were recruited through various guardianship organizations. The supervised persons were recruited through their legal guardian and from a previous study among psychiatric patients. The data were analysed descriptively.

Results

Alltogether, 82 legal guardians and 20 legally supervised persons could be recruited. Thereof 13 legal guardians (15.6%) and 13 legally supervised persons (65.0%) had previous experience with research projects. The majority of the guardians with experience in research projects had consented the participation of their supervised persons (n = 12 guardians, 60.0%; in total n = 16 approvals). The possible burden on the participating person was given as the most frequent reason not to participate both by the guardians (n = 44, 54.4%) and by the supervised persons (n = 3, 30.0%). The most frequent motivation to provide consent to participate in a research study was the desire to help other patients by gaining new scientific knowledge (guardians: n = 125, 78.1%; supervised persons: n = 10, 66.6%).

Conclusions

Overall, an open attitude towards medical research can be observed both among legal guardians and supervised persons. Perceived risks and no sense recognized in the study are reasons for not participating in medical research projects.

Safeguarding Participants in Psychiatric Genetic Research: Perspectives of Key Stakeholder Groups

Public trust in research depends on implementation of research protections. Genetic and psychiatric research may elicit "exceptionalism," the belief that these types of research deserve special protections. Genetic information has been viewed as different from other health information. Psychiatric research has been scrutinized based on concerns about the impact of psychiatric illness on individuals' abilities to make decisions. This study compared four stakeholder groups' attitudes toward research safeguards. Psychiatric genetic researchers and institutional review board chairs received structured surveys. Individuals with mental illness and family members participated in semistructured interviews. Paired sample t-tests were used to compare mean ratings of importance of safeguard procedures for genetic versus nongenetic research on physical versus mental illnesses. All groups provided higher ratings for the importance of safeguards for genetic research and for mental illness. Individuals with mental illness and family members rated the importance of safeguards more highly than researchers and chairs did. Results of generalized linear models showed significant effects of gender and ethnicity.

Are individuals living with mental illness and their preferred alternative decision-makers attuned and aligned in their attitudes regarding treatment decisions?

BACKGROUND

Mental disorders account for considerable suffering and societal burden. Prospective alternative decision-makers may be engaged in helping make treatment decisions for those who live with serious mental disorders. Little is known about the ways in which alternative decision makers arrive at treatment recommendations and whether the perspectives of alternative decision makers and ill individuals are aligned.

METHODS

The authors queried community-dwelling individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia, anxiety, or mood disorders and their preferred alternative decision-makers on issues regarding treatment decisions and underlying ethically-salient perspectives using a written survey instrument. Complete data were obtained on 26 pairs (n = 52, total). Outcomes included perspectives on clinical decision-making and underlying values that may shape their life choices. Two-sided paired t-tests and graphical representations were used.

RESULTS

We found that preferred alternative decision-makers overall accurately predicted the views of ill individuals with respect to the role of the individual and of family in treatment decision making. Preferred alternative decision-makers slightly overestimated autonomy-related perspectives. The personal views of ill individuals and preferred alternative decision-makers were aligned with respect to different physical and mental disorders, except in relation to alcohol and substance use where alternative decision-makers placed greater emphasis on autonomy. Alignment was also discovered on underlying life values, except the role of spirituality which was greater among alternative decision-makers.

CONCLUSION

Preferred alternative decision-makers are an ethical safeguard to ensure the wellbeing and rights of seriously ill individuals. In this pilot study, preferred alternative decision makers were aligned with their ill family members concerning treatment-related decisions and underlying life values. Future research should continue to explore and clarify the views of ill individuals and alternative decision makers to determine the quality of this safeguard used in clinical settings.