Michael Wilson

Background: Legal assisted dying is a rare event, but as legalisation expands, requests for it will likely increase, and the nurse most often receives the informal, initial request. Objectives: To assess the effects of attitude in interaction with normative and control beliefs on an intention to respond to a request for legal assisted dying. Ethical considerations: The study had the lead author’s institutional ethics approval, and participants were informed that participation was both anonymous and voluntary. Methodology: This was a cross-sectional correlational study of 377 Australian registered nurses who completed an online survey. Generalised linear modelling assessed the effects of independent variables against intended responses to requests for legal assisted dying. Results: Compared to nurses who did not support legal assisted dying, nurses who did had stronger beliefs in patient rights, perceived social expectations to refer the request and stronger control in that intention. Nurses who did not support legal assisted dying had stronger beliefs in ethics of duty to the patient and often held dual intentions to discuss the request with the patient but also held an intention to deflect the request to consideration of alternatives. Discussion: This study advances the international literature by developing quantified models explaining the complexity of nurses’ experiences with requests for an assisted death. Attitude was operationalised in interaction with other beliefs and was identified as the strongest influence on intentions, but significantly moderated by ethical norms. Conclusion: The complex of determinants of those intentions to respond to requests for an assisted death suggests they are not isolated from each other. Nurses might have distinct intentions, but they can also hold multiple intentions even when they prioritise one. These findings present opportunities to prepare nurses in a way that enhances moral resilience in the face of complex moral encounters.

Introduction: The emergency medical evaluation of psychiatric patients presenting to United States emergency departments, usually termed “medical clearance,” often varies between EDs. A task force of the American Association for Emergency Psychiatry, consisting of physicians from emergency medicine, physicians from psychiatry and a psychologist, was convened to form consensus recommendations for the medical evaluation of psychiatric patients presenting to U.S.EDs. Methods: The task force reviewed existing literature on the topic of medical evaluation of psychiatric patients in the ED and then combined this with expert consensus. Consensus was achieved by group discussion as well as iterative revisions of the written document. The document was reviewed and approved by the AAEP Board of Directors.Results: Eight recommendations were formulated. These recommendations cover various topics in emergency medical examination of psychiatric patients, including goals of medical screening in the ED, the identification of patients at low risk for co-existing medical disease, key elements in the ED evaluation of psychiatric patients including those with cognitive disorders, specific language replacing the term “medical clearance,” and the need for better science in this area.Conclusion: The evidence indicates that a thorough history and physical examination, including vital signs and mental status examination, are the minimum necessary elements in the evaluation of psychiatric patients. With respect to laboratory testing, the picture is less clear and much more controversial.