Ulysses Contract Research Articles

Binding the Self: The Ethics of Ulysses Contracts

Binding the Self: The Ethics of Ulysses Contracts

Steering clear of Akrasia: An integrative review of self-binding Ulysses Contracts in clinical practice.

In many jurisdictions, legal frameworks afford patients the opportunity to make prospective medical decisions or to create directives that contain a special provision forfeiting their own ability to object to those decisions at a future time point, should they lose decision-making capacity. These agreements have been described with widely varying nomenclatures, including Ulysses Contracts, Odysseus Transfers, Psychiatric Advance Directives with Ulysses Clauses, and Powers of Attorney with Special Provisions. As a consequence of this terminological heterogeneity, it is challenging for healthcare providers to understand the terms and uses of these agreements and for ethicists to engage with the nuances of clinical decision-making with such unique provisions surrounding patient autonomy. In theory, prospective self-binding agreements may safeguard patient's "authentic" wishes from future "inauthentic" changes of mind. In practice, it is unclear what may be comprised within these agreements or how-and to what effect-they are used. The primary focus of this integrative review is to curate the existing literature describing Ulysses Contracts (and analogous decisions) used in the clinical arena, in order to empirically synthesize their shared essence and provide insights into the traditional components of these agreements when used in practice, the requirements of their consent processes, and the outcomes of their utilization.

Psychiatric advance directives (Ulysses Contract): the need for a specific law and a criteria proposal for its introduction.

Advance healthcare directives in the psychiatric field raise more concerns and controversies compared to their use in other medical branches. We discuss the role of advance directives in this field and suggest a criteria proposal for the settlement of a comprehensive regulation on the matter. We analyse the existing law and discuss the ethical points in the Italian context and, in comparison, with the United Kingdom context. Numerous studies have highlighted that psychiatric patients experience advance directives as an instrument to participate in therapeutic decision-making. Regarding the usefulness of advance directives, Italy and the United Kingdom did not approve deontological rules or laws. The United Nations Commission states that, based on the principles of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, it is necessary to respect the spatient's will, even if it is biased by psychic disorders. The Convention does not consider advance directives; instead, they just suggest using some support to have the patient regain their competence. In case this is unsuccessful, it is necessary to appoint a substitute decision-maker to express, even in the light of the advance directives, the will that the patient would have expressed if he had been competent.

Against Ulysses contracts for patients with borderline personality disorder

Patients with borderline personality disorder (BPD) sometimes request to be admitted to hospital under compulsory care, often under the argument that they cannot trust their suicidal impulses if treated voluntarily. Thus, compulsory care is practised as a form of Ulysses contract in such situations. In this normative study we scrutinize the arguments commonly used in favour of such Ulysses contracts: (1) the patient lacking free will, (2) Ulysses contracts as self-paternalism, (3) the patient lacking decision competence, (4) Ulysses contracts as a defence of the authentic self, and (5) Ulysses contracts as a practical solution in emergency situations. In our study, we have accepted consequentialist considerations as well as considerations of autonomy. We conclude that compulsory care is not justified when there is a significant uncertainty of beneficial effects or uncertainty regarding the patient’s decision-making capacity. We have argued that such uncertainty is present regarding BPD patients. Hence, Ulysses contracts including compulsory care should not be used for this group of patients.

Using Blockchain to Improve Decision Making That Benefits the Public Good

Human decision making is often prone to biases and irrationality. Group decisions add dynamic interactions that further complicate the choice process and frequently result in outcomes that are suboptimal for both the individual and the collective. We show that an implementation of a Blockchain protocol improves individuals’ decision strategies and increases the alignment between desires and outcomes. The Blockchain protocol affords (1) a distributed decision, (2) the ability to iterate repeatedly over a choice, (3) the use of feedback and corrective inputs, and (4) the quantification of intrinsic choice attributes (i.e., greed, desire for fairness, etc.). We test our protocol’s performance in the context of the Public Goods Game. The game, a generalized version of the Prisoner’s Dilemma, allows players to maximize their own gain or act in ways that benefit the collective. Empirical evidence shows that participants’ cooperation in the game typically decreases once a single player favors their own interest at the expense of others’. In our Blockchain implementation, “smart contracts” are used to safeguard individuals against losses and, consequently, encourage contributions to the public good. Across different tested simulations, the Blockchain protocol increases both the overall trust among the participants and their profits. Agents decision strategies remain flexible while they act as each other’s source of accountability (which can be seen as formalized distributed “Ulysses contract”). To highlight the contribution of our protocol to society at large we incorporated an entity that represents the public good. This benevolent independent beneficiary of the contributions of all participants (e.g. a charity organization or a tax system) maximized its payoffs when the Blockchain protocol was implemented. We provide a formalized implementation of the Blockchain protocol and discuss potential applications that could benefit society by more accurately capturing individuals’ preferences. For example, the protocol could help maximize profits in groups, facilitate democratic election that better reflect the public opinion, or enable group decision in circumstances where a balance between anonymity, diverse opinions, personal preferences and loss-aversion play a role.

Advance Directive as Ulysses Contract: The Application of Stopping of Eating and Drinking by Advance Directive.

Increased attention is being paid to "dementia directives," advance directives tailored to persons with dementia that outline what treatments an individual with dementia might wish to receive or forgo should they lose capacity. Particular focus has been placed on the request to have assisted oral feedings withheld, the so-called Stopping of Eating and Drinking by Advance Directive (SED by AD), the purpose of which is to hasten death. This article reviews the available literature regarding the practice of SED by AD and explores the clinical and ethical aspects as they present at the bedside. Our review aims to show that practical, clinically applicable ways to approach such requests must be developed in order to balance the fundamental principles at play.

Ulysses in the medical literature

Cultural manifestations are frequently used as a source of descriptors in the field of the health sciences. The story of Odysseus (Ulysses) is one of the oldest and most influential works of world literature and has given rise to many subsequent creations, with strong roots in popular culture. To consider the use of the story of Odysseus in the medical literature, to describe the terms in which it is used, and to discuss its relevance. From a review performed in PubMed, 112 medical publications with references to the myth of Odysseus were found, out of a total of 343 results. Five different conditions named directly after Ulysses were found (three Ulysses syndromes, the Ulysses contract and the Ulysses conflict), together with two others that have been given the names of other characters who are part of the same cycle (Elpenor syndrome and Penelope syndrome), which we analyse in a critical manner referring to the original material from which they have been taken. The story of Odysseus constitutes one of the most frequent sources of inspiration in medicine, both for the creation of descriptors and for the use of similes, metaphors or other rhetorical figures, particularly in the area of neuroscience.

Report Calls for Public Health Approach to Addressing Mass Violence

Report Calls for Public Health Approach to Addressing Mass Violence

Ulysses Contracts in psychiatric care: helping patients to protect themselves from spiralling

This paper presents four arguments in favour of respecting Ulysses Contracts in the case of individuals who suffer with severe chronic episodic mental illnesses, and who have experienced spiralling and...

Ulysses contracts regarding compulsory care for patients with borderline personality syndrome

Introduction Compulsory care is controversial, since respect for the patient’s autonomy is a standard requirement in health care. Many psychiatrists have experienced that patients with borderline personality syndrome sometimes demand compulsory care for themselves in order not to exert self-harm—like Ulysses contracts. The aim of this study was to examine the possible existence and extent of borderline personality syndrome-patient demands for Ulysses contracts regarding compulsory care in acute psychiatry, and how external influences and demands could affect the caregivers’ decisions about compulsory care. Method An anonymous questionnaire, with three questions with fixed answers, was distributed to 42 licensed medical doctors on call at the psychiatric emergency unit in the city of Stockholm. Thirty-three questionnaires were answered, giving a response rate of 79%. Results Ninety-four percent of the respondents recognized the phenomenon of borderline personality syndrome patients requesting compulsory care, 21% stated that this request had affected their clinical decision, and 55% had used compulsory care for other reasons than the patient’s best interest. Discussion The results indicate that compulsory care is sometimes given in the form of Ulysses contracts for borderline personality syndrome patients. Also, compulsory care is sometimes used for other reasons than the borderline personality syndrome patient’s best interest. Psychological mechanisms affect the decisions of both patients and caregivers. More research should be done concerning to whom, why, and with what consequences compulsory care is prescribed.

Ulysses contract in psychiatry

Over the last twenty years we have witnessed a growing focus on the rights of the ill people. The debate on informed consent and a new redefinition of the therapeutic relationship is constantly evolving. With this article, we propose a critical literature review of the so-called "Ulysses contract" or "psychiatric advance directives". It refers to the will that a subject expresses in writing, or orally, about the treatments he or she wishes or does not wish to be subject to if the time comes when it may be impossible to express his/her consent. This can especially occur in those with psychiatric disorders with serious clinical involvement and remitting-relapse (typically bipolar disorder, but also chronic delusional disorders and schizophrenia). In this context, the question is whether during intercritical periods the patient may or may not leave instructions to their care-givers. This aspect opens up to a series of interdisciplinary problems. In this article, we want to show the complexity of this debate from a clinical, ethical, legal and psychodynamic point of view, emphasizing the strengths and the major criticisms of the psychiatric advance directives for each area.

Threats to Neurosurgical Patients Posed by the Personal Identity Debate

Decisions about brain surgery pose existential challenges because they are often decisions about life or death, and sometimes about possible personality changes. Therefore they require rigorous neuroethical consideration. However, we doubt whether metaphysical interpretations of ambiguous statements of patients are useful for deriving ethical and legal conclusions. Particularly, we question the application of psychological theories of personal identity on neuroethical issues for several reasons. First, even the putative “standard view” on personal identity is contentious. Second, diverse accounts of personal identity have been introduced into the neuroethical debate, which are incompatible. Third, the criteria for “diagnosing” the supposed changes in “identity” are ambiguous and indeterminate. Fourth, the metaphysical theories of personal identity imply highly questionable ethical and legal revisions, namely the denial of advance directives, particularly of Ulysses contracts, and, for patients with brain cancer, even therapeutic nihilism. We discuss three examples in which ideas from the personal identity debate in metaphysics are straightforwardly applied to discuss ethical issues of neurosurgery. We discuss revisions of the current medico-legal practice that have been proposed on grounds of psychological theories of personal identity. We argue that the established status quo in law and clinical practice is beneficial to the patients concerned. Furthermore, it is metaphysically neutral, which is an important principle of liberal, democratic, pluralistic societies. We recommend a pragmatic approach: (1) empirical research on personality changes arising from brain disorders or interventions, (2) comprehensive information about risks of personality changes, and (3) advance directives, particularly Ulysses contracts.

The ethics of deep brain stimulation (DBS).

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is an invasive technique designed to stimulate certain deep brain regions for therapeutic purposes and is currently used mainly in patients with neurodegenerative disorders, such as Parkinson's disease. However, DBS is also used increasingly for other experimental applications, such as the treatment of psychiatric disorders (e.g. severe depression), weight reduction. Apart from its therapeutic potential, DBS can cause severe adverse effects, some that might also have a significant impact on the patient's personality and autonomy by the external stimulation of DBS which effects lie beyond the individual's control and free will. The article's purpose is to outline the procedures of DBS currently used in therapeutic and experimental applications and to discuss the ethical concerns regarding this procedure. It will address the clinical benefit-risk-ratio, the particular ethics of research in this field, and the ethical issues raised by affecting a patient's or an individual's personality and autonomous behaviour. Moreover, a potential ethical guideline, the Ulysses contract is discussed for the field of clinical application as well as the question of responsibility.

Thwarting the Diseased Will: Ulysses Contracts, the Self and Addiction

Ulysses contracts are a particular type of advance directive that has been advocated for use in mental health settings and addictions treatment. Taking their name from the legend of Ulysses, such contracts are distinctive insofar as they are designed to thwart certain anticipated future wishes rather than realize them. In this paper, I consider what Ulysses contracts reveal about contemporary conceptions of addiction and the self. Drawing on discussions of Ulysses contracts in the psychiatric and addictions literature, as well as historical and contemporary examples of such, I show that Ulysses contracts are premised on a split between the present 'rational' self and the future 'irrational' self, thereby reproducing a very particular notion of addiction--one that serves to naturalize certain ways of thinking about freedom, choice, coercion, and the self.

The Ulysses contract in obstetrics: a woman's choices before and during labour

Women recognise that labour represents a mind-altering event that may affect their ability to make and communicate decisions and choices. For this reason, birth plans and other pre-labour directives can...

Choosing to limit choice: Self-binding directives in Dutch mental health care

In certain cases of chronic mental illness (for example bipolar disorder) a self-binding directive or Ulysses contract may be a helpful intervention to prevent harm to the person him- or herself and/or others. By choosing such an arrangement, the patient can indicate when and how mental health professionals may intervene against his or her will and provide indicated care which may lead to an improvement of the patient's mental condition. In the Netherlands, since 2008 the Compulsory Admissions Act has been amended and now includes a paragraph on self-binding. Starting from the Dutch debate and statutory regulation of self-binding in mental health care, a number of issues with broader relevance are discussed, particularly as these pertain to the legal regulation and juridification of self-binding. It is argued that too many detailed rules are a threat to increasing patient empowerment.

Ulysses Contracts in Medicine

Ulysses contracts are a method by which one person binds himself by agreeing to be bound by others. In medicine such contracts have primarily been discussed as ways of treating people with episodic mental illnesses, where the features of the illness are such that they now judge that they will refuse treatment at the time it is needed. Enforcing Ulysses contracts in these circumstances would require medical professionals to override the express refusal of the patient at the time treatment is required, something that is generally problematic both ethically and legally. In this paper I will argue that despite appearances Ulysses contracts can make it the case that treating a patient in such circumstances is an instance of treating him with his consent, although safeguards are needed to ensure that this is the case. Given the potential benefits to patients I further argue that modified Ulysses contracts should be made legally enforceable.

How to Justify Enforcing a Ulysses Contract When Ulysses is Competent to Refuse

Sometimes the mentally ill have sufficient mental capacity to refuse treatment competently, and others have a moral duty to respect their refusal. However, those with episodic mental disorders may wish to precommit themselves to treatment, using Ulysses contracts known as "mental health advance directives." How can health care providers justify enforcing such contracts over an agent's current, competent refusal? I argue that providers respect an agent's autonomy not retrospectively--by reference to his or her past wishes-and not merely synchronically--so that the agent gets what he or she wants right now-but diachronically and prospectively, acting so that the agent can shape his or her circumstances as the agent wishes over time, for the agent will experience the consequences of providers' actions over time. Mental health directives accomplish this, so they are a way of respecting the agent's autonomy even when providers override the agent's current competent refusal.

A Typology of Advance Statements in Mental Health Care

A Typology of Advance Statements in Mental Health Care

MAKING A CLEAN BREAK: ADDICTION AND ULYSSES CONTRACTS

I examine current models of self-destructive addictive behaviour, and argue that there is an important place for Ulysses contracts in coping with addictive behaviour that stems from certain problematic preference structures. Given the relevant preference structures, interference based on a Ulysses contract need not involve questionably favouring an agent's past preferences over her current preferences, but can actually be justified in terms of the agent's current concerns and commitments.