Abstract
M.Cur. (Psychiatric nursing)
Withdrawal of life-support treatment is a well-known concept which has been studied often, especially from a medical point of view. The life-world of families involved in decision making concerning withdrawal of life-support of a family member is, however, an unknown field. This leads to the reaction and behavior of families to this traumatic process often begin mistakenly described by professionals as "difficult" , "passive" or "incapable of decision making". The patient and his/her family have, to a large extent, the right of self-determination and the right to take part in decision making. In the intensive care unit it often happens, according to Burger (1996:1-175), that the patient is not able to participate actively in the decision making process because of his/her illness and/or medication. The family then steps forward as decision maker and as the patient's "mouthpiece". The situation arises where the family, who must make the decision about withdrawal of life support treatment, are exposed to utterly moral conflict. Burger (1996:163) found that a family that experiences such trauma is not capable of focusing and assimilating knowledge. Members of the family have a great need for support and the intensive care nurse cannot provide that support for different reasons. One of the reasons being limited time and the other not being able to build therapeutic relationships. Because of the above mentioned, the overall objective of this study is to analyse the phenomenon of families who are involved in decision making concerning withdrawal of life-support treatment of a family member. Guidelines have been formulated according to the analysis of this phenomenon for the psychiatric nurse specialist to mobilise resources for the family to promote, maintain and restore their mental health as integral part of health. The research model of Botes (1989:1-283) is used in this study. The study is undertaken from the Judeo-Christian perspective of Nursing for the Whole Person Theory (Oral Roberts University, Anna Vaughn School of Nursing, 1990:136-142). A phenomenon analysis was undertaken in two phases. During the first phase, secondary analysis of primary data was done on the family used in Burger (1996:1-175) and was followed up by phenomenological interviews with families in the same circumstances and according to the same criteria that Burger (1996:1-175) used in her study. Data were analysed in collaboration with an independent coder. The family used for member checking in this study was also used in data control. A literature control was conducted as part of data control. On the ground of the repetitive themes from the secondary analysis and phenomenological interviews with the family involved in member checking, guidelines were formulated in phase two, based on all the data obtained from phase one, for psychiatric nursing specialists to mobilise resources for families in this situation. The proposed guidelines leave the door open for follow-up research where a model for assistance can be formulated for psychiatric nursing specialists to assist these families, since intensive care personnel are either too involved in the process, or do not always know how to build therapeutic relationships and usually also do not have enough time to attend to the patient's family.