This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.
Abstract
Objective: To survey amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) health care providers to determine attitudes regarding physician-assisted death (PAD) after the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) invalidated the Criminal Code provisions that prohibit PAD in February 2015.
Methods: We conducted a Canada-wide survey of physicians and allied health professionals (AHP) involved in the care of patients with ALS on their opinions regarding (1) the SCC ruling, (2) their willingness to participate in PAD, and (3) the PAD implementation process for patients with ALS.
Results: We received 231 responses from ALS health care providers representing all 15 academic ALS centers in Canada, with an overall response rate for invited participants of 74%. The majority of physicians and AHP agreed with the SCC ruling and believed that patients with moderate and severe stage ALS should have access to PAD; however, most physicians would not provide a lethal prescription or injection to an eligible patient. They preferred the patient obtain a second opinion to confirm eligibility, have a psychiatric assessment, and then be referred to a third party to administer PAD. The majority of respondents felt unprepared for the initiation of this program and favored the development of PAD training modules and guidelines.
Conclusions: ALS health care providers support the SCC decision and the majority believe PAD should be available to patients with moderate to severe ALS with physical or emotional suffering. However, few clinicians are willing to directly provide PAD and additional training and guidelines are required before implementation in Canada.
GLOSSARY
- AHP=
- allied health professionals;
- ALS=
- amyotrophic lateral sclerosis;
- ALSFRS-R=
- ALS Functional Rating Scale;
- PAD=
- physician-assisted death;
- SCC=
- Supreme Court of Canada
Footnotes
Go to Neurology.org for full disclosures. Funding information and disclosures deemed relevant by the authors, if any, are provided at the end of the article.
Editorial, page 1072
Supplemental data at Neurology.org
- Received January 21, 2016.
- Accepted in final form April 7, 2016.
- © 2016 American Academy of Neurology
AAN Members
We have changed the login procedure to improve access between AAN.com and the Neurology journals. If you are experiencing issues, please log out of AAN.com and clear history and cookies. (For instructions by browser, please click the instruction pages below). After clearing, choose preferred Journal and select login for AAN Members. You will be redirected to a login page where you can log in with your AAN ID number and password. When you are returned to the Journal, your name should appear at the top right of the page.
AAN Non-Member Subscribers
Purchase access
Letters: Rapid online correspondence
REQUIREMENTS
You must ensure that your Disclosures have been updated within the previous six months. Please go to our Submission Site to add or update your Disclosure information.
Your co-authors must send a completed Publishing Agreement Form to Neurology Staff (not necessary for the lead/corresponding author as the form below will suffice) before you upload your comment.
If you are responding to a comment that was written about an article you originally authored:
You (and co-authors) do not need to fill out forms or check disclosures as author forms are still valid
and apply to letter.
Submission specifications:
- Submissions must be < 200 words with < 5 references. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
- Submissions should not have more than 5 authors. (Exception: original author replies can include all original authors of the article)
- Submit only on articles published within 6 months of issue date.
- Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
- Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.
