Opinions of health care professionals and the public after eight years of euthanasia legislation in the Netherlands: A mixed methods approach

Author:

Kouwenhoven Pauline SC1,Raijmakers Natasja JH2,van Delden Johannes JM1,Rietjens Judith AC3,Schermer Maartje HN4,van Thiel Ghislaine JMW1,Trappenburg Margo J5,van de Vathorst Suzanne4,van der Vegt Bea J6,Vezzoni Cristiano7,Weyers Heleen8,van Tol Donald G6,van der Heide Agnes3

Affiliation:

1. Julius Center, University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands

2. Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, The Netherlands; Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC, The Netherlands

3. Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, The Netherlands

4. Department of Ethics and Philosophy of Medicine, Erasmus MC, The Netherlands

5. Utrecht School of Governance, Utrecht University, The Netherlands

6. Department of Health Sciences, University of Groningen, The Netherlands

7. Department of Health Sciences, University of Groningen, The Netherlands; Department of Sociology and Social Research, University of Trento, Italy

8. Department of Health Sciences, University of Groningen, The Netherlands; Department of Legal Theory, University of Groningen, The Netherlands

Abstract

Background: The practice of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide (PAS) in the Netherlands has been regulated since 2002 by the Euthanasia Act. In the ongoing debate about the interpretation of this Act, comparative information about the opinions of the different stakeholders is needed. Aim: To evaluate the opinions of Dutch physicians, nurses and the general public on the legal requirements for euthanasia and PAS. Design: A cross-sectional survey among Dutch physicians and nurses in primary and secondary care and members of the Dutch general public, followed by qualitative interviews among selected respondents. The participants were: 793 physicians, 1243 nurses and 1960 members of the general public who completed the questionnaire; 83 were interviewed. Results: Most respondents agreed with the requirement of a patient request (64–88%) and the absence of a requirement concerning life expectancy (48–71%). PAS was thought acceptable by 24–39% of respondents for patients requesting it because of mental suffering due to loss of control, chronic depression or early dementia. In the case of severe dementia, one third of physicians, 58% of nurses and 77% of the general public agreed with performing euthanasia based on an advance directive. Interviewees illustrated these findings and supported the Act. Conclusions: Health care professionals and the general public mostly support the legal requirements for euthanasia and PAS. The law permits euthanasia or PAS for mental suffering but this possibility is not widely endorsed. The general public is more liberal towards euthanasia for advanced dementia than health care professionals. We conclude that there is ample support for the law after eight years of legal euthanasia.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine,General Medicine

Cited by 114 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3