Values Clarification, Advocacy
The End-of-Life Conversation
The End-of-Life Conversation is a Values Clarification and Advocacy scenario. The core lesson: Why naming end-of-life wishes early changes every decision that follows. An older relative has been diagnosed with a serious illness. The prognosis is 6-18 months. DecisionPlay maps the players, payoffs, and equilibrium dynamics that shape how this situation typically resolves.
The situation
An older relative has been diagnosed with a serious illness. The prognosis is 6-18 months. They haven't talked about their end-of-life wishes. You're the closest family member and the likely decision-maker.
Background
End-of-life conversations are among the most avoided and most consequential conversations a family can have. People who study them keep finding the same pattern: it is the families who have talked explicitly about wishes who are spared the worst of the conflict and the guessing. The avoidance doesn't protect anyone, it just defers the decisions to a moment of crisis.
What this reveals
The avoidance cost of mortality conversations
End-of-life conversations are avoided because they feel unkind. The pattern in the research points the opposite way: the families who have them are the ones spared the worst of the conflict and the lasting doubt. The avoidance protects no one, it just defers the decisions to a moment of crisis when no one is equipped to make them well.
How to counter it: The conversation doesn't have to be long or formal. It starts with one question: 'If things got bad, what would matter most to you?' Most people who are given genuine permission to answer that question are grateful for the chance.
A question to sit with
What conversations about mortality are you avoiding with the people closest to you? What would it cost you to start one this month?
Frequently asked questions
- What game theory concept does The End-of-Life Conversation illustrate?
- The End-of-Life Conversation illustrates Values Clarification, Advocacy. Why naming end-of-life wishes early changes every decision that follows.
- What is the situation in The End-of-Life Conversation?
- An older relative has been diagnosed with a serious illness. The prognosis is 6-18 months. They haven't talked about their end-of-life wishes.
- What does The End-of-Life Conversation reveal about how people decide?
- The avoidance cost of mortality conversations. End-of-life conversations are avoided because they feel unkind. The pattern in the research points the opposite way: the families who have them are the ones spared the worst of the conflict and the lasting doubt. The avoidance protects no one, it just defers the decisions to a moment of crisis when no one is equipped to make them well.
- How do you avoid the trap in The End-of-Life Conversation?
- The conversation doesn't have to be long or formal. It starts with one question: 'If things got bad, what would matter most to you?' Most people who are given genuine permission to answer that question are grateful for the chance.
- What is the research behind The End-of-Life Conversation?
- End-of-life conversations are among the most avoided and most consequential conversations a family can have. People who study them keep finding the same pattern: it is the families who have talked explicitly about wishes who are spared the worst of the conflict and the guessing. The avoidance doesn't protect anyone, it just defers the decisions to a moment of crisis.
- How long does The End-of-Life Conversation take to play?
- About 12 min, at advanced difficulty, across 4 decision points. It runs in your browser with no account and no sign-in.
Keep exploring
More Personal Decisions scenarios, or browse all scenarios. New to this? Start with how DecisionPlay works or the game theory glossary.
Topics: end-of-life, values, advocacy, mortality