A qualitative study of nursing practitioners' experiences with COVID-19 patients dying alone in Greece.

Background: In Greece, there is still limited research on death in isolation due to COVID-19. This deserves attention because of the recent financial crisis, which profoundly impacted public health, and the high relevance of the Hippocratic tradition to the moral values of clinical practice. Methods: A prospective qualitative study using in-depth interviews with 15 frontline nursing practitioners working in a COVID-19 ward or intensive care unit (ICU) was conducted from July 2021 to December 2021. Results: The inability of family members to say a final goodbye before, during, or after death by performing proper mourning rituals is extremely inhuman and profoundly impacts the mental health status of patients, family members, and nursing practitioners. Patients and their family members strongly desire to see each other. Epidemiology, liability, and proper nursing performance emerged as reasons for the enforced strict visitation restrictions. Participants emphasized that visitations should be allowed on an individual basis and highlighted the need for the effective use of remote communication technology, which, however, does not substitute for in-person contact. Importantly, physicians allowed "clandestine" visits on an individual basis. Nursing practitioners had a strong empathic attitude toward both patients and their families, and a strong willingness to provide holistic care and pay respect to dead bodies. However, they also experienced moral distress. Witnessing heartbreaking scenes with patients and/or their families causes nursing practitioners to experience intense psychological distress, which affects their family life rather than nursing performance. Ultimately, there was a shift from a patient-centered care model to a population-centered care model. Furthermore, we identified a range of policy- and culture-related factors that exaggerate the negative consequences of dying alone of COVID-19. Conclusion: These results reinforce the existing literature on several fronts. However, we identified some nuances related to political decisions and, most importantly, convictions that are deeply rooted in Greek culture. These findings are of great importance in planning tailored interventions to mitigate the problem of interest and have implications for other similar national contexts.

Might Reinfibulation be Medically Plausible in Carefully Screened Cases?

In light of the relational account of autonomy and the modern (holistic and phenomenological) account of health, this paper examines ethical justifications for ̳consensual' reinfibulation. Significant and constant discomfort in the body following deinfibulation might make a case for reinfibulation (considered as medical treatment in the traditional sense of the term). In any other case, the following requirements should be met for reinfibulation to be considered medically plausible: a) strong evidence that reinfibulation could help effectively improve woman's relational well-being, b) insignificant complications are expected, c) congruence between first-order and second-order autonomy or -in the context of political liberalism- strong second-order autonomy, d) an -open door‖ for the woman to exit an oppressive context, e) rigorous scrutiny of woman's psychology, and f) woman's practical wisdom to organize her identity-related values, find a balance between her extreme emotions and realize her own goal of meaningful life in accordance with her own conception of the good. Conclusively, in carefully screened cases and individually judged requests for reinfibulation, it should not be ruled out that, after having been conducted a multi-disciplinary in- depth investigation at social, psychological and medical level may be met conditions that make a case for reinfibulation.