Heleen Weyers

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

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.

Opinions about euthanasia and advanced dementia: a qualitative study among Dutch physicians and members of the general public

BackgroundThe Dutch law states that a physician may perform euthanasia according to a written advance euthanasia directive (AED) when a patient is incompetent as long as all legal criteria of due care are met. This may also hold for patients with advanced dementia. We investigated the differing opinions of physicians and members of the general public on the acceptability of euthanasia in patients with advanced dementia.MethodsIn this qualitative study, 16 medical specialists, 19 general practitioners, 16 elderly physicians and 16 members of the general public were interviewed and asked for their opinions about a vignette on euthanasia based on an AED in a patient with advanced dementia.ResultsMembers of the general public perceived advanced dementia as a debilitating and degrading disease. Physicians emphasized the need for direct communication with the patient when making decisions about euthanasia. Respondent from both groups acknowledged difficulties in the assessment of patients’ autonomous wishes and the unbearableness of their suffering.ConclusionLegally, an AED may replace direct communication with patients about their request for euthanasia. In practice, physicians are reluctant to forego adequate verbal communication with the patient because they wish to verify the voluntariness of patients’ request and the unbearableness of suffering. For this reason, the applicability of AEDs in advanced dementia seems limited.

Dutch physicians on the role of the family in continuous sedation

In order to relieve intractable suffering of a terminal patient, doctors may decide to continuously sedate a patient until the end of life. Little research is done on the role the family plays during the process of continuous sedation. This study aims to get a view of doctors’ experiences with continuous sedation, and the role of the family throughout that process. We held in-depth interviews with 48 doctors (19 general practitioners, 16 nursing home doctors and 18 medical specialists). Participants were selected varying in experience and opinions concerning end-of-life decisions. Dutch physicians experience the role of family in continuous sedation as important and potentially difficult. Difficulties may rise especially during the final stages when the patient is no longer conscious and family members are waiting for death to come. Disagreement may arise between physician and family, concerning the dignity of the dying process or the question whether the sedated patient is suffering or not. Some physicians report they hastened the dying process, in order to relieve the families’ suffering.

Smoking bans in the Netherlands : A mix of self-regulation and regulation by government

Abstract Self-regulation is supposed to have many advantages. It is seen as cheaper, more effective and more flexible than regulation by government. In this article I examine these assumptions by looking at the self-regulation with respect to smoke-free workplaces with special attention for smoking bans in the Dutch hospitality industry. It turns out that governments deemed these forms of self-regulation as insufficient. Subsequent regulation by the government, however, proved to be rather effective. This contra-intuitive finding is explained by pointing at the preparatory effect of the self-regulation and the importance of the timing of regulation.

Code of Practice Euthanasie nog weinig bekend

SamenvattingWeet u als huisarts hoe uw handelen bij euthanasie wordt beoordeeld?