An overview of the spiritual importances of end-of-life care among the five major faiths of the United Kingdom

Abstract

For many who pertain to particular theological paradigms, their faith cannot be compartmentalised, but is mobilised to inform all aspects of their being, most notably their ethical and moral persuasions. As clinicians, the concept that there are good and bad deaths is already known; understanding the origin and depth of non-physical suffering, and aiming to alleviate it is not possible without learning the individual experiences and beliefs that go with it. Spiritual care forms a fundamental consideration in the endeavor to address the holistic experience of those patients receiving palliative care. Good palliative care seeks to promote the wellbeing and priorities of those with faltering health in a way that continues to support individualised notions of self-determination. The last few decades have resulted in a multicultural and multi-ethnic patient population. Addressing the spiritual and physical needs of patients allows healthcare professionals to deliver truly holistic care. Exploring and understanding the specific nuances of the five major religions of the UK provides healthcare professionals the opportunity to comfort the religiously observant patient at the end of life.

Withdrawal of treatment in a pediatric intensive care unit at a Children’s Hospital in China: a 10-year retrospective study

“…Some scholars in China believe that withdrawal of treatment in ICUs should follow the principle of benefit and respect the patient's willingness and the fairness principle [14]. People also believe that decisions on withholding/withdrawing treatment need to take account of the likely success, benefits, burdens and risks of treatment, as well as the patient's presumed wishes [4]. Ethicists believe that the best interest standard provides insufficient guidance for decision-making regarding children and does not reflect the actual standard used by medical providers and courts; the harm principle provides a more appropriate threshold for state intervention than the best interest standard [15].…”

“…In regions with different social cultures, religions, ethnicities, health care levels, and economic development, people often have different attitudes towards withdrawal of treatment. Even in the same region, there are controversial opinions regarding withdrawing treatment [1,3,4]. China has the largest number of children in the world, with 220 million children aged 0-14 years [5].…”

Withdrawal of Treatment in a Pediatric Intensive Care Unit at a Children’s Hospital in China: A 10-year Retrospective Study

“…Some scholars in China believe that withdrawal of treatment in ICUs should follow the principle of bene t and respect the patient's willingness and the fairness principle [14]. People also believe that decisions on withholding/withdrawing treatment need to take account of the likely success, bene ts, burdens and risks of treatment, as well as the patient's presumed wishes [4]. Ethicists believe that the best interest standard provides insu cient guidance for decision-making regarding children and does not re ect the actual standard used by medical providers and courts; the harm principle provides a more appropriate threshold for state intervention than the best interest standard [15].…”

Withdrawing treatment of Children in the pediatric intensive care unit of a China Children’s Hospital: A Single Center Years Retrospective Analysis

“…willingness and fairness principle [10]. People also believe that decisions on withholding/withdrawing treatment need to take account of the likely success, benefits, burdens and risks of treatment, as well as the patient's presumed wishes [4]. For children, however, withdrawing treatment is decided by their guardian(s), as children do not have full civil liability, and guardians' decisions are not always in the best interest of the child.…”