IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0239423.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

After providing end of life care to relatives, what care options do family caregivers prefer for themselves?

Author

Listed:
  • Jiska Cohen-Mansfield
  • Shai Brill

Abstract

Objectives: We examined how caregivers who had cared for a relative at end of life (EoL) wished to be cared for in the event that they experienced advanced dementia or physical disability in the future, and what factors influenced their preferences for EoL care. Methods: In this mixed-methods study, 83 participants, recruited from multiple sources in Israel, were interviewed concerning socio-demographic factors, health status, past experience with EoL, preference for extension of life vs. quality of life (QoL), willingness to be dependent on others, and preferences for EoL care. Results: In case of advanced dementia, 58% preferred euthanasia or suicide; around a third chose those for physical disability. Care by family members was the least desired form of care in the advanced dementia scenario, although more desirable than institutional care in the physical disability scenario. QoL was rated as the highest factor impacting preferences for EoL care. Men demonstrated a higher preference than women for extension of life over QoL. Conclusion: Our study points to the need for society to consider solutions to the request of participants to reject the type of EoL experienced by their relatives. Those solutions include investing in improving the quality of life at the end of life, and offering alternatives such as euthanasia, which a large proportion of our participants found ethically and medically appropriate within the current system of care in the event of severe physical disability, and more so in the event of advanced dementia.

Suggested Citation

  • Jiska Cohen-Mansfield & Shai Brill, 2020. "After providing end of life care to relatives, what care options do family caregivers prefer for themselves?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(9), pages 1-19, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0239423
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0239423
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0239423
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0239423&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0239423?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Klinkenberg, Marianne & Willems, Dick L. & Onwuteaka-Philipsen, Bregje D. & Deeg, Dorly J. H. & van der Wal, Gerrit, 2004. "Preferences in end-of-life care of older persons: after-death interviews with proxy respondents," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 59(12), pages 2467-2477, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rurup, Mette L. & Onwuteaka-Philipsen, Bregje D. & van der Heide, Agnes & van der Wal, Gerrit & Deeg, Dorly J.H., 2006. "Frequency and determinants of advance directives concerning end-of-life care in The Netherlands," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(6), pages 1552-1563, March.
    2. Hu, Wen-Yu & Huang, Chien-Hsun & Chiu, Tai-Yuan & Hung, Shou-Hung & Peng, Jen-Kuei & Chen, Ching-Yu, 2010. "Factors that influence the participation of healthcare professionals in advance care planning for patients with terminal cancer: A nationwide survey in Taiwan," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 1701-1704, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:plo:pone00:0239423. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.