Introduction: In The Netherlands, physicians have to be convinced that the patient suffers unbearably and hopelessly before granting a request for euthanasia. The extent to which general practitioners (GPs), consulted physicians and members of the euthanasia review committees judge this criterion similarly was evaluated.
Not all patients who requested euthanasia thought their suffering was unbearable, although they had a lasting wish to die. Patients and physicians seemed to agree about this. In cases in which patients said they suffered unbearably there was less agreement about what constitutes unbearable suffering; patients put more emphasis on psychosocial suffering, such as dependence and deterioration, whereas physicians referred more often to physical suffering. In some cases the physician thought that the suffering was not unbearable because the patient’s behaviour seemed incompatible with unbearable suffering—for instance, because the patient was still reading books.
Raphael Cohen-Almagor, University of Hull FROM NEW MEDICAL ETHICS TO INTEGRATIVE BIOETHICS, Ante Covic, Nada Gosic, Luka Tomasevic, eds., pp. 197-216, Zagreb, Pergamena, 2009
In the legal performance of the euthanasia procedure, unbearable suffering, one of the requirements of due care, is difficult to assess. Evaluation of the current knowledge of unbearable suffering is needed in the ongoing debate about the conditions on which EAS can be approved. Using an integrative literature review, we evaluated publications with definitions of suffering in general or in end-of-life situations and with descriptions of suffering in the context of a request for EAS.
Artsen steunen euthanasie bij dementie Publicatie Nr. 27 - 08 juli 2011 Jaargang 2011 Rubriek NieuwsReflex Auteur Joost Visser, KNMG Pagina's 1684 Een op de vijf artsen steunt het burgerinitiatief van Uit Vrije Wil, een op de drie vindt hulp bij zelfdoding aan patiënten met een chronische depressie of beginnende dementie te rechtvaardigen.
In the Netherlands, euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide (PAS) are considered acceptable medical practices in specific circumstances. The majority of cases of euthanasia and PAS involve patients suffering from cancer. However, in 1994 the Dutch Supreme Court in the so-called Chabot-case ruled that “the seriousness of the suffering of the patient does not depend on the cause of the suffering”, thereby rejecting a distinction between physical (or somatic) and mental suffering. This opened the way for further debate about the acceptability of PAS in cases of serious and refractory mental illness. An important objection against offering PAS to mentally ill patients is that this might reinforce loss of hope, and demoralization. Based on an analysis of a reported case, this argument is evaluated. It is argued that offering PAS to a patient with a mental illness who suffers unbearably, enduringly and without prospect of relief does not necessarily imply taking away hope and can be eth...