The semantics of “good dying” from an ethical perspective

Abstract

Purpose: The paper aims to investigate whether dissent—within hospices and palliative care units—can be observed with regard to typical characteristics of “good dying” (beyond the consensus that can be found in the literature), how statements about dying processes that are not perceived as good are expressed, and finally which ethically significant normative consequences arise from this. Method: The study is conducted on the basis of a qualitative interview study in different groups of actors and the relationships of these groups are compared with each other. Results: Notions of good and bad dying are articulated—even dissented upon—not so much by the patients and their relatives themselves as by the professional actors. This is connected with the requirements of a practice, which evidently evokes a need for accountability, namely for communicative assurance. Conclusion: An abstract designation of “good dying” (typically: quiet, self-determined, accompanied and peaceful) is in danger of losing sight of the contextual characteristics of the practice associated with it, which can lead to situations that are problematic from an ethical viewpoint.