Annual Meeting Panel to Examine the Evolution of Physician Aid in Dying
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Back to table of contents Previous article Next article Annual MeetingFull AccessAnnual Meeting Panel to Examine the Evolution of Physician Aid in DyingMark MoranMark MoranSearch for more papers by this authorPublished Online:26 Feb 2023https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.pn.2023.03.3.26AbstractPanel members will discuss the challenge of defining standards for “irremediability” in psychiatric disorders and will discuss the impact of expanding laws regarding physician-assisted dying on marginalized populations suffering from life distress.Physician Aid in Dying (PAD), also known as Medical Aid in Dying (MAiD) has been legalized or decriminalized in over a dozen jurisdictions around the world, and assisted dying policies continue to evolve, including in the United States. Many jurisdictions are exploring whether to introduce PAD laws or expand existing law to include PAD based on a mental disorder.“The psychiatrist helping patients to consider this unique and permanent request has a responsibility to assess for potentially treatable contributing conditions, including demoralization,” says John Peteet, M.D.This year’s Annual Meeting in San Francisco will feature a panel discussion titled “Physician-Assisted Death and Psychiatric Disorders.” PAD for mental disorders has been permitted for two decades in the Netherlands and Belgium, and 2023 marks the legalization of the practice in Canada (to be introduced as of March 2023).John Peteet, M.D., will explore how capacity for PAD may differ from capacity to refuse treatment. He is an associate professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School and director of the psychosocial oncology and palliative care fellowship at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute.“I plan to focus on the role of the psychiatrist in evaluating patients for capacity to request MAiD, which is a role we play in several U.S. jurisdictions now,” he told Psychiatric News. “I’ll be suggesting that rather than a straightforward assessment of depression and the intellectual understanding of what is involved, the psychiatrist as a physician helping patients to consider this unique and permanent request has a responsibility to assess for potentially treatable contributing conditions, including demoralization.”Case examples will illustrate that at stake is not only the patient’s cognitive capacity and DSM diagnosis, but also the patient’s emotional capacity and the professional and clinical responsibility of the doctor to the patient.K. Sonu Gaind, M.D., a professor of psychiatry at the University of Toronto and past president of the Canadian Psychiatric Association, will review the Canadian experience, as Canada moves toward providing MAiD for patients with psychiatric disorders. Gaind is on the Council of Canadian Academies Expert Panel reviewing PAD for mental disorders.Marie Nicolini, M.D., Ph.D., psychiatrist and researcher at the Belgian Research Foundation Flanders and Georgetown University, will discuss the history of PAD for patients with psychiatric disorders in the Netherlands and Belgium.Panel members will discuss the challenge of defining adequate standards for “irremediability” in psychiatric disorders and patient requests for PAD and discuss the potential impact of expanding PAD laws on marginalized populations suffering from life distress. ■ ISSUES NewArchived
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».