Article Text
Abstract
Background and objectives In Bahrain, maintaining life support at all costs is a cultural value considered to be embedded in the Islamic religion. We explore end-of-life decision making for brain dead patients in an Arab country where medical cultures are dominated by Western ideas and the lay culture is Eastern.
Methods In-depth interviews were conducted from February to April 2018 with 12 Western-educated Bahraini doctors whose medical practice often included end-of-life decision making. Discussions were about who should make withdrawal of life support decisions, how decisions are made and the context for decision making. To develop results, we used the inductive method of thematic analysis.
Results Informants considered it difficult to engage non-medical people in end-of-life decisions because of people’s reluctance to talk about death and no legal clarity about medical responsibilities. There was disagreement about doctors’ roles with some saying that end-of-life decisions were purely medical or purely religious but most maintaining that such decisions need to be collectively owned by medicine, patients, families, religious advisors and society. Informants practised in a legal vacuum that made their ethics interpretations and clinical decision making idiosyncratic regarding end-of-life care for brain dead patients. Participants referred to contrasts between their current practice and previous work in other countries, recognising the influences of religious and cultural dimensions on their practice in Bahrain.
Conclusions End-of-life decisions challenge Western-trained doctors in Bahrain as they grapple with aligning respect for local culture with their training in the ethical practice of Western medicine.
- ethics
- palliative care
- religious ethics
- moral and religious aspects
- legal aspects
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
SA and BA contributed equally.
Contributors All authors of the manuscript are the guarantors of this research work and accept full responsibility for the work and the conduct of the study. We had access to the data and controlled the decision to publish this work.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests None declared.
Ethics approval The ethics committee of the hospital where this research was undertaken approved the study protocol.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Patient consent for publication Not required.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Do Not Resuscitate orders and ethical decisions in a neonatal intensive care unit in a Muslim community
- Death and organ donation: back to the future
- The impact of regional culture on intensive care end of life decision making: an Israeli perspective from the ETHICUS study
- 283 DO NOT RESUSCITATE ORDERS AND WITHDRAWAL OF LIFE SUPPORT IN DYING PEDIATRIC PATIENTS
- The do-not-resuscitate order: associations with advance directives, physician specialty and documentation of discussion 15 years after the Patient Self-Determination Act
- Is there a place for CPR and sustained physiological support in brain-dead non-donors?
- A narrative review of the empirical evidence on public attitudes on brain death and vital organ transplantation: the need for better data to inform policy
- Should patient consent be required to write a do not resuscitate order?
- End of life decisions: attitudes of Finnish physicians
- Evaluation of end of life care in cancer patients at a teaching hospital in Japan