I Don’t Want to Be the One Saying ‘We Should Just Let Him Die’: Intrapersonal Tensions Experienced by Surrogate Decision Makers in the ICU
- 1.4k Downloads
Although numerous studies have addressed external factors associated with difficulty in surrogate decision making, intrapersonal sources of tension are an important element of decision making that have received little attention.
To characterize key intrapersonal tensions experienced by surrogate decision makers in the intensive care unit (ICU), and explore associated coping strategies.
Qualitative interview study.
Thirty surrogates from five ICUs at two hospitals in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, who were actively involved in making life-sustaining treatment decisions for a critically ill loved one.
We conducted in-depth, semi-structured interviews with surrogates, focused on intrapersonal tensions, role challenges, and coping strategies. We analyzed transcripts using constant comparative methods.
Surrogates experience significant emotional conflict between the desire to act in accordance with their loved one’s values and 1) not wanting to feel responsible for a loved one’s death, 2) a desire to pursue any chance of recovery, and 3) the need to preserve family well-being. Associated coping strategies included 1) recalling previous discussions with a loved one, 2) sharing decisions with family members, 3) delaying or deferring decision making, 4) spiritual/religious practices, and 5) story-telling.
Surrogates’ struggle to reconcile personal and family emotional needs with their loved ones’ wishes, and utilize common coping strategies to combat intrapersonal tensions. These data suggest reasons surrogates may struggle to follow a strict substituted judgment standard. They also suggest ways clinicians may improve decision making, including attending to surrogates’ emotions, facilitating family decision making, and eliciting potential emotional conflicts and spiritual needs.
KEY WORDSdecision making end of life care ethics intensive care
Dr. Schenker was supported by a Junior Faculty Career Development Award from the National Palliative Care Research Center and by Award Number KL2 RR024154 from the National Center for Research Resources. Dr. White was supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute 1R01HL094553-01. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Center for Research Resources or the National Institutes of Health.
This work was presented in an earlier form at the Fifth Annual Kathleen M. Foley Palliative Care Retreat and Research Symposium in Quebec, Canada in October, 2011.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they do not have a conflict of interest.
- 12.Lind R, et al. Family members' experiences of "wait and see" as a communication strategy in end-of-life decisions. Intensive Care Med. 37(7):1143-50.Google Scholar
- 17.Kryworuchko J. Understanding the Options: Planning care for critically ill patients in the Intensive Care Unit; 2009: http://decisionaid.ohri.ca/docs/das/Critically_Ill_Decision_Support.pdf. Accessed 18 July 2012.Google Scholar
- 23.Kvale S. Interviews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1996.Google Scholar
- 24.Charmaz K. Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis. London: Sage Publications; 2006.Google Scholar
- 25.Grbich C. Qualitative Data Analysis: An Introduction. London: Sage Publications; 2007.Google Scholar
- 30.Billings JA, Krakauer EL. On patient autonomy and physician responsibility in end-of-life care. Arch Intern Med. 171(9):849-53.Google Scholar
- 31.Quill TE, Holloway R. Time-limited trials near the end of life. JAMA. 306(13):1483-4.Google Scholar