Alberta euthanasia survey: 2. Physicians' opinions about the acceptance of active euthanasia as a medical act and the reporting of such practice.

OBJECTIVE: To ascertain the opinions of Alberta physicians about the acceptance of active euthanasia as a medical act (the "medicalization" of active euthanasia) and the reporting of colleagues practising active euthanasia, as well as the sociodemographic correlates. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey of a random sample of Alberta physicians, grouped by site and type of practice. SETTING: Alberta. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 2002 (46%) of the licensed physicians in Alberta were mailed a 38-item questionnaire in May through July 1991; usable responses were returned by 1391 (69%). RESULTS: Although only 44% of the respondents considered active euthanasia morally "right" at least 70% opted to medicalize the practice if it were legal by restricting it to be performed by physicians and to be taught at medical sites. Even though active euthanasia is criminal homicide in Canada, 33% of the physicians stated that they would not report a colleague participating in the act of anyone, and 40% and 60% stated that they would not report a colleague to medical or legal authorities respectively. Acceptance or rejection of active euthanasia as a medical act was strongly related to religious affiliation and activity (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: This survey about active euthanasia revealed profound incongruities in the opinions of the sample of Alberta physicians concerning their ethical and social duties in the practice of medicine. These data highlight the need for relevant modifications of health education policies concerning biomedical ethics and physicians' obligations to society.     

Alberta euthanasia survey: 1. Physicians' opinions about the morality and legalization of active euthanasia.

OBJECTIVE: To ascertain the opinions of a sample of Alberta physicians about the morality and legalization of active euthanasia, the determinants of these opinions and the frequency and sources of requests for assistance in active euthanasia. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey of a random sample of Alberta physicians, grouped by site and type of practice. SETTING: Alberta. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 2002 (46%) of the licensed physicians in Alberta were mailed a 38-item questionnaire in May through July 1991; usable responses were returned by 1391 (69%). RESULTS: Of the respondents 44% did believe that it is sometimes right to practice active euthanasia; 46% did not. Moral acceptance of active euthanasia correlated with type of practice and religious affiliation and activity. In all, 28% of the physicians stated that they would practice active euthanasia if it were legalized, and 51% indicated that they would not. These opinions were significantly related to sex, religious affiliation and activity, and country of graduation. Just over half (51%) of the respondents stated that the law should be changed to permit patients to request active euthanasia. Requests (usually from patients) were reportedly received by 19% of the physicians, 78% of whom received fewer than five. CONCLUSIONS: This survey revealed severely disparate opinions among Alberta physicians about the morality of active euthanasia. In particular, religious affiliation and activity were associated with the polarized opinions. The desire for active euthanasia, as inferred from requests by patients, was not frequent. Overall, there was no strong support expressed by the physicians for the personal practice of legalized active euthanasia. These data will be vital to those involved in health education and public policy formation about active euthanasia in Alberta and the rest of Canada.     

Facing requests for euthanasia: a clinical practice guideline

On 23 September 2002, the Belgian law on euthanasia came into force. This makes Belgium the second country in the world (after the Netherlands) to have an Act on euthanasia. Even though there is currently legal regulation of euthanasia in Belgium, very little is known about how this legal regulation could be translated into care for patients who request euthanasia.     

Attitudes towards euthanasia.

There are an infinite variety of attitudes to euthanasia, each individual response to the concept being influenced by many factors. Consequently there is a literature on the subject ranging from the popular article to papers in specialized journals. This study, however, has taken a well defined sample of people, inviting them to answer a questionnaire which was designed to elicit their attitudes to euthanasia in a way which could be analysed statistically. Nor surprisingly attitudes appeared to 'harden' as those answering the questionnaire grew more experienced in dealing with patients and also more professionally established. Thus it was found that of the seven groups questioned practising physicians showed more positive attitudes to euthanasia and their responses did not differ significantly from those of senior medical students. It is these groups which actually or potentially have to resolve the clinical dilemma posed by the dying patient.     

Buddhism, euthanasia and the sanctity of life.

Damien and John Keown claim that there is important common ground between Buddhism and Christianity on the issue of euthanasia and that both traditions oppose it for similar reasons in order to espouse a "sanctity of life" position. I argue that the appearance of consensus is partly created by their failure to specify clearly enough certain key notions in the argument: particularly Buddhism, euthanasia and the sanctity of life. Once this is done, the Keowns' central claims can be seen to be either false or only restrictedly true.