Author
Abstract
The literature suggests that doctors' and nurses' openness about communicating with the terminally ill and their families has increased in the past two or three decades, partly influenced by the hospice movement. The present study reports the perceptions of relatives, hospital doctors, general practioners and nurses who knew a random sample of 639 adults dying in England in 1987. The results from professionals suggest a general preference for openness about illness and death, tempered by the consideration that bad news needs to be broken slowly, in a context of support, while recognising that not everyone wishes to know all. In practice people dying from cancer were more likely to be reported as knowing what their illness was and that they would die than were people dying from other conditions. This difference held when controlling for the fact that death was more likely to be medically expected in cancer. Comparisons with 1969 show that the increases were due largely to cancer patients being told the truth more frequently by hospital doctors. This may be due to changed practices, or to the increase in the number of hospital episodes in the last year of life. Nevertheless, situations of 'closed awareness' where relatives were told and patients were not, situations where patients were left to guess the likely outcome for themselves, were still quite common in 1987. Nurses and hospice practitioner were only marginally involved in breaking bad news, this remaining the province of hospital doctors and general practitioners. Relatives in general praised the manner in which they and patients were told, although small proportion reported insensitive practice. In retrospect a high proportion of both relatives and professionals felt that the levels of awareness were best as they were, although this preference may have been influenced by a desire to see things in a good light. Most relatives reported adequate support and information being given by professionals to them during the patient's illness. On the whole, doctors provided information, and friends and family provided emotional support to relatives. Again, hospital doctors played an increasingly important role compared to 1969 in providing information, with general practitioners' role decreasing in this area. Gaps in information included not being told enough about what was wrong with the patient, not being told the reasons for decisions about treatment and, to a lesser extent, not being given information about how to care for the patient.
Suggested Citation
Seale, Clive, 1991.
"Communication and awareness about death: A study of a random sample of dying people,"
Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 943-952, January.
Handle:
RePEc:eee:socmed:v:32:y:1991:i:8:p:943-952
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Citations
Citations are extracted by the
CitEc Project, subscribe to its
RSS feed for this item.
Cited by:
- Olson, Rebecca E. & Smith, Alexandra & Good, Phillip & Neate, Emily & Hughes, Cody & Hardy, Janet, 2021.
"Emotionally reflexive labour in end-of-life communication,"
Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 291(C).
- Stephanie Watts Sussman & Lee Sproull, 1999.
"Straight Talk: Delivering Bad News through Electronic Communication,"
Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 10(2), pages 150-166, June.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:32:y:1991:i:8:p:943-952. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.