Search for a command to run...
<h3></h3> Three years ago, at the Palliative Care Congress, while I was talking about truth-telling, someone asked: ‘what about hope?’. For my medical school elective this summer, I set out to draw on these thoughts, bringing together elements of ethical theory and practice. Through witnessing patients and talking to clinicians in paediatric oncology and two hospices I developed an appreciation of the ethics of hope in challenging medical situations, focussing on three key questions: what is hope; how does hope relate to truth; and why be concerned about hope anyway? The method employed drew on philosopher Alice Crary’s assertion that the world is not morally inert but ‘ethically inflected’ (Crary, 2016, p. 85), meaning moral characteristics are empirically discoverable through an understanding of another’s circumstances. In contrast to common definitions, hope is not simply a future-orientated belief or emotion, but a faith in life. This is a more fitting definition for situations where a patient’s future is likely curtailed. With this in mind, we can also begin to see beyond the idea that truth will always stymie hope, but to appreciate that truth and hope can aid each other in mutual relation: with truth, hope becomes a friend; with hope, truth is not abandonment. This is not to paint a single-mindedly cheerful picture of hope, though. Drawing on art and literature, we can appreciate the nuances in the human understanding of this concept. Though the language of hope was not always present, there was still an undeniable sense that it was unavoidable, both for patients and for clinicians. Alongside this is the continual threat of hopelessness and despair. Treading this line can be ethically fraught but in walking it with patients, we learn to dwell in the messiness, and to see the light come through.