False memories and end-of-life treatment decisions
MEDIA RELEASE
False memories and end-of-life
treatment decisions
A major collaborative study shows that false memories can play a significant role in the discrepancy between people’s preferences for end-of-life treatment and their instructions in their living will.
Dr
Maryanne Garry, a researcher at Victoria's School of
Psychology, contributed to a collaborative study of more
than 400 adults above the age of 65 alongside academics at
the University of California, Irvine, Queen's University
(California) and the University of New South Wales
(Australia).
Their study, published in the current issue
of the American Psychological Association journal Health
Psychology, shows that preferences for life-sustaining
treatments such as tube-feedings and CPR often change as
people age or experience new health problems.
Dr Garry
says that while the documentation for living wills—also
called advance directives— typically reminds people of
their right to update their directives if their wishes
change, this assumes that people recognise when their wishes
have changed, and remember that their current wishes are
different from those documented in their living will. The
study participants were interviewed about which
life-sustaining treatments they would want if they were
seriously ill, and were interviewed again 12 months later to
test their recall of earlier decisions. About one-third of
participants changed their wishes regarding medical
treatment over the course of the year, and in 75 per cent of
these cases, participants falsely remembered that their
original views on the issues matched their new ones.
Interviewers also talked to people with the authority to
make medical decisions on behalf of the study subjects if
they were no longer able to. Dr Garry says these potential
surrogate decision-makers were even less sensitive to
changes in their loved one’s wishes, showing false
memories in 86 per cent of cases.
Dr Garry and her colleagues recommend that living wills have an expiration date that would prompt a review of end-of-life treatment directives. On a more personal level, the researchers stressed the importance of maintaining an ongoing dialogue among patients, their families and their physicians about end-of-life treatment options.
The study was conducted by Dr Garry, Dr Stefanie Sharman of the University of New South Wales (a Victoria graduate), Assistant Professor Jill Jacobson of Queen’s University, and Professors Peter Ditto and Elizabeth Loftus of the University of California at Irvine.
ends