��������

Regret is used in medical contexts as a reason to deny certain treatments, because physicians often assume that regret is a harm that must be prevented. Alyssa Izatt, a PhD candidate in Philosophy, is challenging this assumption and supporting patient rights to autonomy.��

Humans have the right to make decisions about their own bodies, and part of that right is making decisions with a risk of regret, says Izatt. In medical contexts, this right is especially relevant for women’s reproductive health.��

“Even if a woman has an option closed off, maybe even if she does come to regret having a procedure, it doesn't negate a right to make that decision,” she said.��

Providers often deny women tubal ligations, which are permanent sterilization procedures, because the women might regret them in the future. Izatt claims this goes against women’s rights to bodily autonomy. Though she agrees that informed consent is important, she worries that regret can be used to support paternalistic interventions in treatment and policy. ��

Izatt values collaborating with researchers in fields like medicine and law to examine these issues from multiple angles. She has done collaborative research on ethical considerations for denying women sterilization procedures, and she hopes to have a greater impact through interdisciplinary work. ��

As a philosopher, Izatt sees her role in interdisciplinary collaboration as finding and challenging theoretical assumptions used in practice. She also questions the commonly assumed relationship where pregnant women are mere containers for their babies as opposed to babies being part of pregnant women, a view she considers dehumanizing. ��

Failing to recognize common assumptions can have a major impact on policy and legislation, says Izatt. Worries about patient regret and other less obvious assumptions heavily influence rules and legislation. ��

“I’m interested as well in these policy questions, like how are we treating this? What sort of norms are we implicitly sneaking into certain policy decisions?” said Izatt. ��

Izatt hopes that by making the theory in these practices accessible, her research will positively impact both access and policy.��

British Columbia’s Adult Guardianship Act requires certain agencies to investigate and respond to adult abuse and neglect, particularly where the adult is disabled or ill. Professionals do not receive enough training on meeting the Act’s obligations.��

Because professionals’ perspectives and lack of specific training shape these assessments, social work PhD student studies how health professionals understand decision-making and risk in relation to the Act. ��

According to Marriette, professionals assess cases rather differently from one discipline to another. As a Registered Social Worker, her education prioritized looking at a client’s whole situation, considering factors like culture, language, environment and income. Other professions only look at the individual level, excluding factors such as hierarchies in families or adults guiding their actions by what’s best for their community. ��

One common problem in assessments is black-and-white thinking. Assessors often want to say a person simply can or cannot make decisions for themselves, but reality is more complex. Individual standards of living vary, and professionals should consider specific adjustments that preserve a person’s ability to decide what’s important in their life. ��

If these assessments are done poorly, the consequences can be dire.��

“From a human rights perspective, we can very much negatively affect someone’s life,” said Marriette. “They can be put into long-term care against their will. They can have their financial management given to someone else.” ��

Even when programs and professionals understand their obligations, the Act does not provide the necessary resources to properly carry out assessments and provide support. For example, a designated responder may need to move someone away from imminent danger to a safe place, but emergency services have no authority under the Act. ��

“We have a piece of legislation, but we feel like we aren't given the support to actually carry out the job that we're expected to do,” said Marriette. “We lack training, we lack education and we lack the actual legal backing to do the work.”��

Marriette plans to build a training program and specialization for professionals on working under the Act, especially on how to assess risk and decision-making. She also hopes to bring more attention to the issue and social work’s ongoing contributions.��

“I really see my research as sort of ongoing advocacy,” said Marriette, “in my role as a social worker and the work that I do under the Adult Guardianship Act.”��

Policymakers need research evidence to make informed decisions. PhD Candidate is investigating how scholars can best communicate their research to decision-makers. ��

According to Wahl, researchers are more comfortable sharing their evidence than engaging with policymakers’ values and beliefs. However, stories from a real client or an example based on multiple experiences can explain the impact of research while speaking to policymakers’ values. ��

“Storytelling is a strategy for linking the evidence you're bringing forward as a researcher to that broader context,” said Wahl. "That might be helpful to a policymaker who’s trying to develop a policy or make a decision.” ��

Wahl finds it critical to examine how decisions are made, particularly on polarizing topics where there are greater risks to uninformed policies where policymakers may prioritize re-election over research evidence. ��

“It's become even more timely as we've seen some of the political changes that have been going on and have social media effects on knowledge consumption,” said Wahl. “I think it's a really critical time for scientists and researchers to reflect on the work that they do, what they're trying to achieve and how they can achieve that in the best way, and what the consequences might be for sticking with the approaches that we conventionally take.”��

In her research, Wahl focuses on what makes knowledge translation for abortion care and family planning effective. Stories are a key factor in this work.��

She has also communicated stories directly to policymakers through EndoAct, an advocacy organization that came from her master’s research on endometriosis. Wahl has found storytelling and bringing a patient rather effective in this work. ��

“We've heard from policymakers that seeing the stories and sometimes having people with lived experience in those meetings is extremely helpful, because they're getting the evidence but it's also tying into their broader responsibility for public service,” said Wahl. ��

Wahl hopes her research will help scientists make compelling cases for their work. ��

“We are in an era increasingly where researchers really have to communicate effectively on behalf of their evidence,” said Wahl. “I would like for my research to prompt a discussion about the tools that we as scientists use to communicate.”��