Back

Psycho-oncologists' roles, tasks, and needs regarding requests for assisted suicide - a qualitative interview study on current experiences and future directions

Henning, Z.; Scholl, I.; Hahlweg, P.

2025-12-15 oncology
10.64898/2025.12.12.25342138 medRxiv
Show abstract

PurposeAssisted suicide (AS) is a socio-political and healthcare challenge. In Germany, AS is legal, with further regulation pending. Previous German legislation drafts proposed involving psychosocial professionals like psycho-oncologists. These are experienced in supporting seriously ill patients and end-of-life decisions. However, there is a lack of studies on their role in AS. This study aimed to explore psycho-oncologists current and future roles, tasks and needs regarding AS requests. MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional, qualitative interview study with psycho-oncologists in Germany. Inclusion criteria were current clinical activity as a psycho-oncologist and having talked to at least one patient about AS. Invitations to participate were distributed via email and social media using the study teams network. Interested participants responded voluntarily (convenience sample). Data were analyzed using Practical Thematic Analysis. ResultsTwelve interviews were conducted (average length of 42 minutes). Participating psycho-oncologists (58% female, 50% up to 40 years, 100% psychology- or psychiatry-related professional background) primarily saw themselves as open-minded conversation partners, both currently and in the future. Opinions differed whether psycho-oncologists should assess capacity for free decision-making. The vast majority rejected participation in realizing AS. They opposed psycho-oncologists having to fulfill mandatory tasks in the context of AS. Key needs for engaging in AS-related work included clinical practice guidelines, legal clarity, and specific training opportunities. ConclusionThis study provides initial insights into (potential) roles, tasks, and needs of psycho-oncologists in AS requests. It can serve as a basis for follow-up studies. Suitable structures and training opportunities should be developed.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 5%
23.9%
2
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 2%
10.7%
3
Brain and Behavior
37 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.7%
4
Psychiatry Research
35 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.2%
50% of probability mass above
5
JMIR Formative Research
32 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.7%
6
Frontiers in Psychiatry
83 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
4.4%
7
BMC Health Services Research
42 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
3.5%
8
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 42%
2.9%
9
Health Expectations
12 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.2%
10
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.8%
11
Cancers
200 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
12
JMIR Research Protocols
18 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.3%
13
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 11%
1.0%
14
BMC Psychiatry
22 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.9%
15
Journal of Psychiatric Research
28 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.9%
16
Brain, Behavior, & Immunity - Health
27 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.9%
17
Frontiers in Neuroscience
223 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.8%
18
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
124 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.8%
19
Frontiers in Oncology
95 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
20
Frontiers in Psychology
49 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
21
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.8%
22
Biology Methods and Protocols
53 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
23
Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry
36 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
24
Schizophrenia Research
29 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.7%
25
Acta Neuropsychiatrica
12 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
26
eClinicalMedicine
55 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.5%