Comparing attitudes towards compulsory interventions in severe and persistent mental illness among psychiatrists in India and Switzerland.

BACKGROUND: Psychiatrists face a major ethical challenge when deciding whether to make use of coercive measures in the treatment process of patients suffering from severe and persistent mental illness (SPMI). As India and Switzerland show major cultural, political and financial differences, it is hypothesized that attitudes towards coercive measures among Indian and Swiss psychiatrists will vary too. Exploring differences in attitudes between cultures strengthens the critical reflection on one's own stances and in consequence, on our way of action. Especially when it comes to situations involving power imbalances between patients and health practitioners, self-reflection is essential to prevent ethically inappropriate behavior. METHODS: An online survey on aspects of care for patients with SPMI was sent to 3'056 members of the Indian Psychiatric Society between April and June 2020 and to 1'311 members of the Swiss Society for Psychiatry and Psychotherapy between February and March 2016. The respondents' answers were compared. This article deals with the questionnaire's items on autonomous decision making and the implementation of coercive measures in clinical practice. More precisely, participating psychiatrists were asked to rate the importance of patient's autonomy in general and their willingness to apply coercive measures regarding two specific case vignettes depicting a patient with schizophrenia and one with depression. The statistical analysis, namely descriptive data analysis and calculation of arithmetic means, Shapiro Wilks tests and Mann-Whitney U tests, was carried out using IBM SPSS Statistics version 27. RESULTS: Answers were received from 206 psychiatrists in India and 457 psychiatrists in Switzerland. Indian participants tended to value autonomous decision making as slightly less important than Swiss participants (62.2% vs. 91%, p =.01). Regarding a case of severe and persistent depression, psychiatrists in the Indian group were on average more in favor of acting against the wishes of the patient (55% vs. 34.1%, p <.0001) as well as of accepting a temporary decrease in quality of life due to coercion (40% vs. 23%, p =.008). Answers concerning a case of schizophrenia revealed that Indian participants were more in favor of acting against the patient's wishes than Swiss participants (39% vs. 37%, p =.007), whereas the comparison whether to accept a temporary decrease in quality of life regarding this case showed no significant difference (p =.328). CONCLUSIONS: The significant difference in attitudes towards coercive measures among Indian compared to Swiss psychiatrists found in this study might arise from a predominantly more collectivist society in India compared to Switzerland. Moreover, differences in financial resources, the organization of the health care system, and the historical background might have an influence. Continuous and critical reflection on one's own views and behavior is essential, especially if ethical principles and individual rights could be violated through a power imbalance, as in the case of coercive measures.

With great power comes great vulnerability: an ethical analysis of psychedelics' therapeutic mechanisms proposed by the REBUS hypothesis.

Psychedelics are experiencing a renaissance in mental healthcare. In recent years, more and more early phase trials on psychedelic-assisted therapy have been conducted, with promising results overall. However, ethical analyses of this rediscovered form of treatment remain rare. The present paper contributes to the ethical inquiry of psychedelic-assisted therapy by analysing the ethical implications of its therapeutic mechanisms proposed by the relaxed beliefs under psychedelics (REBUS) hypothesis. In short, the REBUS hypothesis states that psychedelics make rigid beliefs revisable by increasing the influence of bottom-up input. Put differently, patients become highly suggestible and sensitive to context during a psychedelic session, amplifying therapeutic influence and effects. Due to that, patients are more vulnerable in psychedelic-assisted therapy than in other therapeutic interventions; they lose control during a psychedelic session and become dependent on the therapeutic setting (including the therapist). This enhanced vulnerability is ethically relevant and has been exploited by some therapists in the past. Therefore, patients in current research settings and starting mainstream medical settings need to be well informed about psychedelics' mechanisms and their implications to give valid informed consent to treatment. Furthermore, other security measures are warranted to protect patients from the vulnerability coming with psychedelic-assisted therapy.

Conversational Artificial Intelligence in Psychotherapy: A New Therapeutic Tool or Agent?

Conversational artificial intelligence (CAI) presents many opportunities in the psychotherapeutic landscape-such as therapeutic support for people with mental health problems and without access to care. The adoption of CAI poses many risks that need in-depth ethical scrutiny. The objective of this paper is to complement current research on the ethics of AI for mental health by proposing a holistic, ethical, and epistemic analysis of CAI adoption. First, we focus on the question of whether CAI is rather a tool or an agent. This question serves as a framework for the subsequent ethical analysis of CAI focusing on topics of (self-) knowledge, (self-)understanding, and relationships. Second, we propose further conceptual and ethical analysis regarding human-AI interaction and argue that CAI cannot be considered as an equal partner in a conversation as is the case with a human therapist. Instead, CAI's role in a conversation should be restricted to specific functions.

Capacity to consent to psychotherapy: Reliability of the newly adapted German version of the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Treatment for psychotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Patients' capacity to consent to treatment (CCT) is a prerequisite for ethically sound informed consent in psychotherapy. The MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Treatment (MacCAT-T) is a reliable instrument for assessing CCT. A German version was adapted to the psychotherapeutical context (MacCAT-PT) to investigate its reliability and possible influences of age, education and prior experience with psychotherapy on CCT in a mixed clinical sample. METHODS: N = 108 patients with indication for psychotherapy were recruited. The MacCAT-PT was administered by trained psychologists, took 20 min on average and was rated by the administering psychologist and an independent rater. Reliability statistics were investigated and regression analyses were conducted on MacCAT-PT scores and sociodemographic variables. RESULTS: Sufficient to moderate inter-rater reliability (ICC = 0.80) and internal consistency (α = 0.80) were found for the total sum score of the MacCAT-PT and its scales, Understanding (ICC = 0.79, α = 0.77), Reasoning (ICC = 0.57, α = 0.65) and Making a Choice (ICC = 0.57). Appreciation featured an unacceptable inter-rater reliability (ICC = -0.01). Regression analyses indicated no significant effects. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that the MacCAT-PT is a reliable tool for assessing patients' overall CCT in psychotherapy. Psychometric properties of three scales were of good quality, while Appreciation needs to be reanalysed in patient samples with lower motivation for psychotherapy or limited CCT. The CCT may be suggested to be independent of age, education and prior experience. Future research should provide analyses focusing on structural and clinical validity in multiple clinical samples.

[Kulturelle Kompetenz in der klinischen Ethik]. / Kulturelle Kompetenz in der klinischen Ethik.

INTRODUCTION: Language, cultural identity, values, or migration experiences of patients, relatives and medical professionals have a significant influence on health care. In individual cases, this can lead to the perceptions of moral problems and conflicts, and to requests for clinical ethics support service. What is the role of clinical ethicists in the face of such perceptions? How does a culturally competent clinical ethics support service look like? In the present contribution, this question will be examined on the basis of reflections on the relationship between culture and ethics as well as the discussion about culturally competent medical ethics. On that basis, recommendations for a culturally competent clinical ethics support are derived.

A two-center pilot study on the effects of clinical ethics support on coercive measures in psychiatry.

BACKGROUND: The use of formal coercion such as seclusion, mechanical restraint, and forced medication is one of the most challenging and complex issues in mental health care, on the clinical, the legal, and the ethical level. Clinical ethics support aims at assisting healthcare practitioners in determining the morally most justifiable course of action in these situations. However, the effectiveness of clinical ethics support has hardly been studied so far. METHODS: Monthly moral case deliberation (MCD) was implemented in two acute wards of two different psychiatric hospitals in Switzerland. Frequency and intensity of coercion was measured on ward level (npatients = 405), and the Moral Attentiveness Scale, Knowledge on Coercion Scale, and Staff Attitudes towards Coercion Scale were applied on healthcare practitioner level (nHP = 46). Pre-post-comparisons were conducted using multi-level modeling where appropriate. RESULTS: After implementation of MCD, formal coercion was less frequent (particularly seclusion, small effect size; 9.6 vs. 16.7%, p = .034, Cramér's V = .105) and less intense (particularly mechanical restraint, large effect size; 86.8 ± 45.3 vs. 14.5 ± 12.1 h, exact p = .019, r = -.74), and approval for coercive measures among healthcare practitioners was lower when controlling for the number of MCD sessions attended. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical ethics support such as MCD may be a hitherto underutilized service for the reduction of coercion, complementing existing strategies and programs. Implementing clinical ethics support may help improve quality of care for persons suffering from severe mental illness.

Palliative psychiatry in a narrow and in a broad sense: A concept clarification.

Even with optimal treatment, some persons with severe and persistent mental illness do not achieve a level of mental health, psychosocial functioning and quality of life that is acceptable to them. With each unsuccessful treatment attempt, the probability of achieving symptom reduction declines while the probability of somatic and psychological side effects increases. This worsening benefit-harm ratio of treatment aiming at symptom reduction has motivated calls for implementing palliative approaches to care into psychiatry (palliative psychiatry). Palliative psychiatry accepts that some cases of severe and persistent mental illness can be irremediable and calls for a careful evaluation of goals of care in these cases. It aims at reducing harm, relieving suffering and thus improving quality of life directly, working around irremediable psychiatric symptoms. In a narrow sense, this refers to patients likely to die of their severe and persistent mental illness soon, but palliative psychiatry in a broad sense is not limited to end-of-life care. It can - and often should - be integrated with curative and rehabilitative approaches, as is the gold standard in somatic medicine. Palliative psychiatry constitutes a valuable addition to established non-curative approaches such as rehabilitative psychiatry (which focuses on psychosocial functioning instead of quality of life) and personal recovery (a journey that persons living with severe and persistent mental illness may undertake, not necessarily accompanied by mental health care professionals). Although the implementation of palliative psychiatry is met with several challenges such as difficulties regarding decision-making capacity and prognostication in severe and persistent mental illness, it is a promising new approach in caring for persons with severe and persistent mental illness, regardless of whether they are at the end of life.

Suffering is not enough: Assisted dying for people with mental illness.

Persons with mental disorders who are resistant to evidence-based treatment can be referred to as patients with severe and persistent mental illness (SPMI). Some patients with SPMI develop a strong wish for assisted dying. Switzerland has the longest history of non-medicalized assisted dying, which is considered a civil right even in non-pathological situations. Public debate in Switzerland about the issue of suffering in the context of assisted dying is current and ongoing. The Swiss Academy of Medical Sciences recently revised its end-of-life policy and specified intolerable suffering due to severe illness or functional limitations (and acknowledged as such by a physician) as a core criterion for assisted dying. We argue that suffering is a necessary but insufficient condition for assisted dying, and that the criteria should also include decision-making capacity and refractoriness of suffering. We further contend that suffering is a subjective experience that can only be quantified by the patient and cannot be objectively compared across individuals. Some patients with SPMI and refractory suffering who maintain decision-making capacity will meet the criteria for assisted dying. We advocate for palliative psychiatric care that relinquishes any disease-modifying therapy, accepts limited survival chances, and focuses on measures that enhance the patient's quality of life, understood in a very broad sense beyond only health-related quality of life. This approach should also relieve suffering as much as possible while remaining open to the possibility of assisted dying following conscientious assessment of the criteria.

[Shared Decision-Making for Patients with Mental Disorders or Cognitive Impairments]. / Shared Decision-Making bei Patient_innen mit psychischen Störungen oder kognitiven Beeinträchtigungen.

Shared Decision-Making for Patients with Mental Disorders or Cognitive Impairments Abstract. Shared Decision-Making (SDM) describes a model of collaborative decision-making that combines the expert knowledge of health professionals and the experiential knowledge of patients. This allows patients to play a more active role in the decision-making process. SDM is also becoming increasingly important in the treatment of persons with mental disorders or cognitive impairments. However, implementation of SDM for this group of patients may face specific challenges, for example, if their decision-making capacity is impaired or if coercion has to be used to prevent acute danger to themselves or others. On the other hand, SDM offers important opportunities in this area. For example, mental health professionals are often more dependent on the patients' experiential knowledge in clinical decision-making than in somatic care. Furthermore, empowerment and a good therapeutic relationship are central aspects in the treatment of people with mental disorders or cognitive impairments, which can be strengthened by SDM. Against the background of these specific challenges, an overview of opportunities for and experiences with SDM in the care of people with mental disorders or cognitive impairments is given. In addition, different approaches for promoting the implementation of SDM for this patient group will be identified.

Informal coercion during childbirth: risk factors and prevalence estimates from a nationwide survey of women in Switzerland.

BACKGROUND: In many countries, the increase in facility births is accompanied by a high rate of obstetric interventions. Lower birthrates or elevated risk factors such as women's higher age at childbirth and an increased need for control and security cannot entirely explain this rise in obstetric interventions. Another possible factor is that women are coerced to agree to interventions, but the prevalence of coercive interventions in Switzerland is unknown. METHODS: In a nationwide cross-sectional online survey, we assessed the prevalence of informal coercion during childbirth, women's satisfaction with childbirth, and the prevalence of women at risk of postpartum depression. Women aged 18 years or older who had given birth in Switzerland within the previous 12 months were recruited online through Facebook ads or through various offline channels. We used multivariable logistic regression to estimate the risk ratios associated with multiple individual and contextual factors. RESULTS: In total, 6054 women completed the questionnaire (a dropout rate of 16.2%). An estimated 26.7% of women experienced some form of informal coercion during childbirth. As compared to vaginal delivery, cesarean section (CS) and instrumental vaginal birth were associated with an increased risk of informal coercion (planned CS risk ratio [RR]: 1.52, 95% confidence interval [1.18,1.96]; unplanned CS RR: 1.92 [1.61,2.28]; emergency CS RR: 2.10 [1.71,2.58]; instrumental vaginal birth RR: 2.17 [1.85,2.55]). Additionally, migrant women (RR: 1.45 [1.26,1.66]) and women for whom a self-determined vaginal birth was more important (RR: 1.15 [1.06,1.24]) more often reported informal coercion. Emergency cesarean section (RR: 1.32 [1.08,1.62]), being transferred to hospital (RR: 1.33 [1.11,1.60]), and experiencing informal coercion (RR: 1.35 [1.19,1.54]) were all associated with a higher risk of postpartum depression. Finally, women who had a non-instrumental vaginal birth reported higher satisfaction with childbirth while women who experienced informal coercion reported lower satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: One in four women experience informal coercion during childbirth, and this experience is associated with a higher risk of postpartum depression and lower satisfaction with childbirth. To prevent traumatic after-effects, health care professionals should make every effort to prevent informal coercion and to ensure sensitive aftercare for all new mothers.

Informed consent in psychotherapy: a survey on attitudes among psychotherapists in Switzerland.

BACKGROUND: The legal and ethical guidelines of psychological professional associations stipulate that informed consent by patients is an essential prerequisite for psychotherapy. Despite this awareness of the importance of informed consent, there is little empirical evidence on what psychotherapists' attitudes towards informed consent are and how informed consent is implemented in psychotherapeutic practice. METHODS: 155 psychotherapists in Switzerland completed an online survey assessing their attitudes regarding informed consent. RESULTS: Among the surveyed psychotherapists, there was a high consensus on important information that should be communicated to patients in the context of informed consent. Almost all psychotherapists rated confidentiality and its exemptions (95%) and self-determined decision-making (97%) as important. The importance to disclose information regarding fees and the empirical effectiveness of the provided treatment, were both seen as important by more than 80% of participants. The disclosure of personal information about the therapist was rated as important by 60%. Other aspects, which are not direct components of informed consent but rather overarching goals, were also evaluated rather homogeneously: self-determined decision making of the patient was rated as important by almost all of the surveyed psychotherapists (97%). The following components were also judged as important by a majority of the participants: promotion of hope (80%) and discussion of treatment goals (93%). Most psychotherapists described the implementation of informed consent as an ongoing process, rather than a one-time event during the first session of therapy. Therapists' age, postgraduate training, treated patient group, and setting influenced attitudes towards informed consent. CONCLUSIONS: The present study shows that informed consent is perceived by psychotherapists as both a challenge and a resource. The implementation of informed consent in psychotherapy requires further research from a clinical and ethical perspective.

Decision-making capacity evaluations: the role of neuropsychological assessment from a multidisciplinary perspective.

Decision-making capacity (DMC) in aging adults has become increasingly salient as the number of older adults, life expectancy, and the amount of wealth to be transferred from older generations have all increased. The accurate and reliable determination of older adults' DMC is a particularly important topic given its implication in legal, financial, and health decisions. Based upon the four-ability DMC model promulgated by Appelbaum and Grisso in the 1980's, a number of MacArthur Competence Assessment Tools have been developed and widely utilized. However, these tools do not include cognitive testing or other sources of objective data and have limited validity in a medico-legal setting, necessitating additional options for the evaluation of DMC. This is significant from the perspective of the patient because they have a vested interest in accurate and objective assessment of their DMC across domains.Given the disparities in the assessment of DMC, the authors propose, through this debate article, that the evaluation of DMC in the aging adult population utilize a combination of traditional interview and domain specific instruments and neuropsychological testing. To achieve a consensus on the issue, medical experts in a number of fields related to capacity evaluation, including psychiatry, neurology, neuropsychology, and general medicine were consulted and recruited as authors. Experts in Swiss law and ethics were also consulted and provided input.A tendency to focus on a single capacity, and in particular, the ability to consent to medical treatment, arose in the literature. Similarly, there are many instruments purporting to evaluate a single capacity (e.g., consenting to medical treatment, managing finances), while other areas important to the evaluation of DMC received little attention (e.g., activities of daily living, the ability to live independently, to marry, to resist undue influence, and to make a will or advanced care directive). Medical and legal experts in the multidisciplinary group agreed that there is a clear need for more consistency across evaluation of DMC domains and that a combined approach of traditional methods and neuropsychological testing provides a more thorough evaluation and better serves the patient.

Evaluation of decision-making capacity in patients with dementia: challenges and recommendations from a secondary analysis of qualitative interviews.

BACKGROUND: Evaluation of decision-making capacity to consent to medical treatment has proved to be difficult in patients with dementia. Studies showed that physicians are often insufficiently trained in the evaluation of decision-making capacity. In this study, we present findings from a secondary analysis of a qualitative interviews with physicians. These interviews were initially used to assess usability of an instrument for the evaluation of decision-making capacity. By looking at difficult cases of decision-making capacity evaluation in patients with dementia, we provide recommendations for such evaluations in clinical practice. METHODS: We used thematic coding to analyse physicians' narratives of problematic decision-making capacity evaluations in patients with dementia to uncover challenging issues of decision-making capacity evaluation. RESULTS: In this study, decision-making capacity evaluations in patients with dementia were mainly perceived as challenging when they pertained to treatment refusals and treatment unrelated circumstances, such as psychiatric consultation, advance directives, and new living arrangements. Furthermore, the physicians reported training needs regarding situation-independent challenges with decision-making capacity evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: Upon further examining self-reported training needs and challenging cases, we have developed recommendations to improve decision-making capacity evaluations in clinical practice. In these recommendations, we argue that being able to evaluate decision-making capacity is an integral part of the informed consent process.

The Affordable Care Act and Recent Reforms: Policy Implications for Equitable Mental Health Care Delivery.

Controversy exists over how to ethically distribute health care resources and which factors should determine access to health care services. Although the US has traditionally used a market-based private insurance model that does not ensure universal coverage, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) in the United States aims to increase equitable access to health care by increasing the accessibility, affordability, and quality of health care services. This article evaluates the impact of the ACA on equitable mental health care delivery according to access factors that can hinder or facilitate the delivery of mental health services based on need. The ACA has successfully expanded coverage to millions of Americans and promoted coordination and access to mental health care; however, financial and non-financial access barriers to mental health care and access disparities remain. Reform efforts should not undervalue the gains that the ACA has made but should attempt to balance considerations of cost and increasing free-market mechanisms with decreasing remaining health care disparities.

Decision-making capacity: from testing to evaluation.

Decision-making capacity (DMC) is the gatekeeping element for a patient's right to self-determination with regard to medical decisions. A DMC evaluation is not only conducted on descriptive grounds but is an inherently normative task including ethical reasoning. Therefore, it is dependent to a considerable extent on the values held by the clinicians involved in the DMC evaluation. Dealing with the question of how to reasonably support clinicians in arriving at a DMC judgment, a new tool is presented that fundamentally differs from existing ones: the U-Doc. By putting greater emphasis on the judgmental process rather than on the measurement of mental abilities, the clinician as a decision-maker is brought into focus, rendering the tool more of an evaluation guide than a test instrument. In a qualitative study, the perceived benefits of and difficulties with the tool have been explored. The findings show on the one hand that the evaluation aid provides basic orientation, supports a holistic perspective on the patient, sensitizes for ethical considerations and personal biases, and helps to think through the decision, to argue, and to justify one's judgment. On the other hand, the room for interpretation due to absent operationalisations, related ambiguities, and the confrontation with one's own subjectivity may be experienced as unsettling.

Acceptability of palliative care approaches for patients with severe and persistent mental illness: a survey of psychiatrists in Switzerland.

BACKGROUND: Some patients develop severe and persistent mental illness (SPMI) which is therapy-refractory. The needs of these patients sometimes remain unmet by therapeutic interventions and they are at high risk of receiving care that is inconsistent with their life goals. Scholarly discourse has recently begun to address the suitability of palliative care approaches targeting at enhancing quality of life for these patients, but remains to be developed. METHOD: A cross-sectional survey asked 1311 German-speaking psychiatrists in Switzerland (the total number of German-speaking members of the Swiss Society for Psychiatry and Psychotherapy) about the care of SPMI patients in general, and about palliative care approaches in particular. 457 (34.9%) returned the completed survey. In addition, participants were asked to evaluate three case vignettes of patients with SPMI. RESULTS: The reduction of suffering and maintaining daily life functioning of the patient were rated as considerably more important in the treatment of SPMI than impeding suicide and curing the underlying illness. There was broad agreement that SPMI can be terminal (93.7%), and that curative approaches may sometimes be futile (e.g. 72.4% for the anorexia nervosa case vignette). Furthermore, more than 75% of the participating psychiatrists were in favour of palliative care approaches for SPMI. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the present study suggest that the participating psychiatrists in Switzerland regard certain forms of SPMI as posing high risk of death. Additionally, a majority of respondents consider palliative care approaches appropriate for this vulnerable group of patients. However, the generalizability of the results to all psychiatrists in Switzerland or other mental health professionals involved in the care of SPMI is limited. This limitation is important considering the reservations towards palliative care in the context of psychiatric illness, mainly because of the association with death and futility. Palliative care approaches, however, are applicable in conjunction with other therapies intended to prolong life. A next step could be to involve service users and develop a consensus of what palliative care might encompass in SPMI. A framework for identifying which patients might benefit from palliative care, should be explored for the future development of care for SPMI patients.

The notion of free will and its ethical relevance for decision-making capacity.

BACKGROUND: Obtaining informed consent from patients is a moral and legal duty and, thus, a key legitimation for medical treatment. The pivotal prerequisite for valid informed consent is decision-making capacity of the patient. Related to the question of whether and when consent should be morally and legally valid, there has been a long-lasting philosophical debate about freedom of will and the connection of freedom and responsibility. MAIN TEXT: The scholarly discussion on decision-making capacity and its clinical evaluation does not sufficiently take into account this fundamental debate. It is contended that the notion of free will must be reflected when evaluating decision-making capacity. Namely, it should be included as a part of the appreciation-criterion for decision-making capacity. The argumentation is mainly drawn on the compatibilism of Harry Frankfurt. CONCLUSIONS: A solution is proposed which at the same time takes the notion of free will seriously and enriches the traditional understanding of decision-making capacity, strengthening its justificatory force while remaining clinically applicable.

Attitudes toward assisted suicide requests in the context of severe and persistent mental illness: A survey of psychiatrists in Switzerland.

OBJECTIVE: Switzerland is among the few countries worldwide where a request for assisted suicide (AS) can be granted on the basis of a primary psychiatric diagnosis. Psychiatrists play an increasingly important role in this regard, especially when the request for AS arises in the context of suffering caused by severe and persistent mental illness (SPMI). The objective of the survey was to assess general attitudes among psychiatrists in Switzerland regarding AS requests from patients with SPMI. METHOD: In a cross-sectional survey of 1,311 German-speaking psychiatrists in Switzerland, participants were asked about their attitude to AS for patients with SPMI, based on three case vignettes of patients diagnosed with anorexia nervosa, treatment-refractory depression, or severe persistent schizophrenia. RESULT: From a final sample of 457 psychiatrists (a response rate of 34.9%) whose mean age was 57.8 years, 48.6% of respondents did not support access to AS for persons diagnosed with SPMI, 21.2% were neutral, and 29.3% indicated some degree of support for access. In relation to the case vignettes, a slightly higher percentage of respondents supported the patient's wish to seek AS: 35.4% for those diagnosed with anorexia nervosa, 32.1% for those diagnosed with depression, and 31.4% for those diagnosed with schizophrenia. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: Although a majority of the responding psychiatrists did not support AS for SPMI patients, about one-third would have supported the wishes of patients in the case vignettes. In light of the increasing number of psychiatric patients seeking AS and the continuing liberalization of AS practices, it is important to understand and take account of psychiatrists' perspectives.

Assessment of decision-making capacity in patients requesting assisted suicide.

In this editorial, we argue that current attitudes toward terminally ill patients are generally too paternalistic, and that it is wrong to assume that patients suffering from mental health issues (including depression) cannot consent to assisted suicide.Declaration of interestNone.