"Dying with a Smile, Just Knowing that Somebody's Listened to Me": End-Of-Life Care and Medical Assistance in Dying in Canadian Prisons

How do people in prison access palliative care? A scoping review of models of palliative care delivery for people in prison in high-income countries

BACKGROUND

An ageing prison population with complex health needs combined with punitive sentencing practices means palliative care for incarcerated individuals is increasingly important. However, there is limited evidence regarding the models of care delivery in high-income countries, and their associated challenges and benefits.

AIM

To develop a typology of models of palliative care provision for incarcerated individuals, synthesise evidence of their outcomes and describe facilitators of and challenges in delivering different models of palliative and end-of-life care in prisons.

DESIGN

Scoping review following Arksey and O'Malley, with narrative synthesis. The protocol was registered prospectively (reviewregistry1260).

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, the Social Sciences Citation Index and grey literature were searched on 15th March 2023. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) was used for quality appraisal.

RESULTS

A total of 16,865 records were screened; 22 peer-reviewed articles and 18 grey literature sources met the inclusion criteria. Three models were identified: Embedded Hospice, Outsourcing Care and Community Collaboration. The Embedded Hospice model shows potential benefits for patients and prisons. Outsourcing Care may miss opportunities for comprehensive care. Collaborative Care relies on proactive prison-community relationships that could be formalised for improvement. Psychosocial and bereavement needs of those dying in prison and their caregivers lack sufficient documentation.

CONCLUSION

Further research is needed to evaluate prison hospice costs and examine how prison hospices impact compassionate release usage. Beyond the USA, policies might formalise care pathways and recognise best practices. Further investigation to address psychosocial needs of people in prison with life-limiting illnesses and post-death bereavement support is required.

Caring for people in prison with palliative and end-of-life care needs

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The prison population is growing and ageing, and many people will die from natural causes while incarcerated. This article provides a contemporary review of key issues related to palliative and end-of-life care in prisons.

RECENT FINDINGS

Few countries have integrated prison hospices. Palliative care needs may go unrecognised in prison. Older offenders may not trust the prison to care for them and may benefit from segregation. Cancer remains a major cause of death. Training staff remains a priority, and technology can help facilitate this. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) had a significant impact on prisons, less is known about its impact on palliative care. Compassionate release is underutilised, and the issue of medically assisted dying adds complexity to decisions around end-of-life care. Peer carers can provide reliable symptom assessment. Family members are often absent when someone dies in prison.

SUMMARY

Palliative and end-of-life care in prisons requires a joined-up approach, and staff must understand the challenges of both this and custodial care in general. The relational network both inside and outside of the prison should be involved, and when possible and appropriate, we should consider alternatives to dying whilst incarcerated, such as compassionate release.

Assisted dying requests from people in detention: Psychiatric, ethical, and legal considerations-A literature review

The principle of equivalence of care states that prisoners must have access to the same standard of health care as the general population. If, as recent court decisions suggest, assisted dying is not limited to people with a terminal physical illness or irremediable suffering, it might also be requested by people with severe mental illness in detention. Some of the countries with legal regulations on assisted dying also have recommendations on how to handle requests from prisoners. However, detention itself can lead to psychological distress and suicidality, so we must consider whether and how people in such settings can make autonomous decisions. Ethical conflicts arise with regard to an individual's free will, right to life, and physical and personal integrity and to the right of a state to inflict punishment. Furthermore, people in prison often receive insufficient mental health care. In this review, we compare different practices for dealing with requests for assisted dying from people in prison and forensic psychiatric facilities and discuss the current ethical and psychiatric issues concerning assisted dying in such settings.

Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) for Canadian Prisoners: A Case Series of Barriers to Care in Completed MAiD Deaths

Background: As of August 2020, 11 patients who were federally incarcerated in a Canadian prison requested medical assistance in dying (MAiD), and three received it. This case study seeks to understand the process of care as described by physicians involved in each of the cases that resulted in MAiD. Methods: During the summer of 2020, semistructured interviews were conducted with physicians involved in each known Correctional Service of Canada (CSC) MAiD case. Transcripts were summarized to illuminate details of the care process for each patient, highlighting barriers to patient-centered care. Results: Each case took place in a different province. One MAiD provision took place in a prison hospital, and two provisions took place after the incarcerated patients were transferred to external community hospitals. Case summaries highlight the physicians' efforts and challenges in assuring patient-centered care. Discussion: Physician experiences illuminate several barriers to care: CSC bureaucratic processes that forced longer wait times than typical for patients in the general public; challenges related to accessing release before MAiD application; knowledge of patient preference for location of death; concerns of voluntariness and confidentiality that are unique to CSC patients; and ethical considerations surrounding the presence of prison guards, police officers, and shackles at the time of assessment or provision. Reporting by the Office of the Correctional Investigator highlights additional challenges in these cases. Further inquiry is necessary to include the perspectives of prisoners and prison staff, and to consider how the evolution of new MAiD legislation will affect MAiD for prisoners.