The central argument is that healthcare professionals are not trained well enough in mentally/ emotionally handling patient relationships when providing end-of-life care for terminal/ chronic illnesses.
Overall the film included the most important perspectives; doctors, patients, and the family of the patients. I think the perspective of nurses or caregivers that aren't family would've been helpful though, as they would care for the patient most often and also feel grief from losing them.
The film best addresses health care professionals and families of those with chronic illness, as it shows the medical professionals' struggles and successes in providing comfort, closure, and knowledge in end-of-life care. It provides more empathy to the doctors who may get very involved in their patients' lives and who also feel grief when their patient has to get more bad news or passes away.
Emergency responders not portrayed in the film; only medical professionals involved in long-term patient care are addressed.
The stakeholders are Dr. Atul Gawande, other healthcare professionals, and the patients with terminal illnesses. They have to decide what the patient's priorities are, treatment options, and basically how much time and quality of life patients are willing to trade for extended years to live. Is the treatment making the patient worse or better? Doctors have to put themselves in a position of vulnerability by personally getting to know their patients, and deal with the guilt and blame if their treatments aren't successful or what they had said to the patient's family.
The narrative is sustained through Atul Gawande's experience and research into improving his end-of-life care for his own patients by meeting with other healthcare professionals (oncologists, palliative care experts and surgeons), and analyzing his actions with his father. The film has strong emotional appeal, as loss of loved ones is a common experience, and difficult for all parties involved.
Scientific info isn't really in depth (disease processes aren't talked about) mostly just psycho-social aspects discussed.
The parts of the film that I found most persuasive and compelling were Atul Gawande's personal experience. As both a surgeon and son, he has the unique viewpoint of being the one to be the bearer of bad news and be the one to accept his father's mortality as his cancer progressed. Gawande gives rational and emotional parts of end-of-life care, and is able to learn new ways of handling mortality as a healthcare provider and a human.