Exploring the experience of supporting a loved one through a medically assisted death in Canada.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To explore the experience of family and close friends of patients seeking medical assistance in dying (MAID) in Canada. DESIGN: Qualitative study using semistructured interviews. SETTING: A clinic in Vancouver, BC, that provides MAID services. PARTICIPANTS: Eighteen support people for patients seeking MAID. METHODS: Clinic patients seeking MAID identified their primary support people during consultations for an assisted death evaluation. Identified support people were invited to participate in the study, and those who were interested were asked to contact the interviewers. Semistructured interviews were conducted, transcribed, coded, and subjected to content analysis to elucidate common themes. MAIN FINDINGS: All participants were supportive of their loved one's wish for assisted death and they provided emotional and practical support in preparation for MAID. Support persons talked about the journey they went through from their loved one's diagnosis to the MAID request to the actual death. Some were initially opposed but changed their minds after seeing the suffering their loved ones endured. The time before the assisted death involved saying goodbye and, for some, ceremonial rituals (celebration of life, poems, singing, etc). Those interviewed after their loved one's assisted death found the death peaceful and reported that it offered advantages compared with natural death in their loved one's individual circumstances. CONCLUSION: This study provides insight into experiences of support people coping with a loved one who is seeking or has sought MAID in the context of a country unfamiliar with the legal process of a planned and hastened death. Participants were supportive of their loved one's wishes for assistance in death to end suffering and found the process to be peaceful overall.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".