End-of-life decisions in medical practice: a survey of doctors in Victoria (Australia)

OBJECTIVES: To discover the current state of opinion and practice among doctors in Victoria, Australia, regarding end-of-life decisions and the legalisation of voluntary euthanasia. Longitudinal comparison with similar 1987 and 1993 studies. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: Cross-sectional postal survey of doctors in Victoria. RESULTS: 53% of doctors in Victoria support the legalisation of voluntary euthanasia. Of doctors who have experienced requests from patients to hasten death, 35% have administered drugs with the intention of hastening death. There is substantial disagreement among doctors concerning the definition of euthanasia. CONCLUSIONS: Disagreement among doctors concerning the meaning of the term euthanasia may contribute to misunderstanding in the debate over voluntary euthanasia. Among doctors in Victoria, support for the legalisation of voluntary euthanasia appears to have weakened slightly over the past 17 years. Opinion on this issue is sharply polarised.     

Raping and making love are different concepts: so are killing and voluntary euthanasia.

The distinction between 'kill' and 'help to die' is argued by analogy with the distinction between 'rape' and 'make love to'. The difference is the consent of the receiver of the act, therefore 'kill' is the wrong word for an act of active voluntary euthanasia. The argument that doctors must not be allowed by law to perform active voluntary euthanasia because this would recognise an infringement of the sanctity of life ('the red light principle') is countered by comparing such doctors with the drivers of emergency vehicles, who are allowed to drive through red lights.     

Professed religious affiliation and the practice of euthanasia.

Attitudes towards active voluntary euthanasia (AVE) and physician-assisted suicide (PAS) among 1,238 doctors on the medical register of New South Wales varied significantly with self-identified religious affiliation. More doctors without formal religious affiliation ('non-theists') were sympathetic to AVE, and acknowledged that they had practised AVE, than were doctors who gave any religious affiliation ('theists'). Of those identifying with a religion, those who reported a Protestant affiliation were intermediate in their attitudes and practices between the agnostic/atheist and the Catholic groups. Catholics recorded attitudes most opposed to AVE, but even so, 18 per cent of Catholic medical respondents who had been so requested, recorded that they had taken active steps to bring about the death of patients.     

The Dutch experience with euthanasia: lessons for Canada?

Anne Mullens used a recent fellowship provided by the Atkinson Foundation to take an in-depth look at euthanasia in the Netherlands. During her time in Holland, she discussed the issue with doctors who support and oppose euthanasia. She accompanied a doctor as he visited a patient who was dying of cancer and was beginning to consider the possibility of euthanasia. She talked to a nonphysician who is adamantly opposed to euthanasia and carries a card stating that. She visited a hospital in Amsterdam that has received requests from foreigners seeking euthansia. Mullens offers a comprehensive look at an issue that continues to provoke strong feelings among Canadian physicians and patients.     

Life support and euthanasia, a perspective on Shaw's new perspective

It has recently been suggested by Shaw (2007) that the distinction between voluntary active euthanasia, such as giving a patient a lethal overdose with the intention of ending that patient's life, and voluntary passive euthanasia, such as removing a patient from a ventilator, is much less obvious than is commonly acknowledged in the literature. This is argued by suggesting a new perspective that more accurately reflects the moral features of end-of-life situations. The argument is simply that if we consider the body of a mentally competent patient who wants to die, a kind of 'unwarranted' life support, then the distinction collapses. We argue that all Shaw has provided is a perspective that makes the conclusion that there is little distinction between voluntary active euthanasia and voluntary passive euthanasia only seemingly more palatable. In doing so he has yet to convince us that this perspective is superior to other perspectives and thus more accurately reflects the moral features of the situations pertaining to this issue.     

The impact on patient trust of legalising physician aid in dying

OBJECTIVE: Little empirical evidence exists to support either side of the ongoing debate over whether legalising physician aid in dying would undermine patient trust. DESIGN: A random national sample of 1117 US adults were asked about their level of agreement with a statement that they would trust their doctor less if "euthanasia were legal [and] doctors were allowed to help patients die". RESULTS: There was disagreement by 58% of the participants, and agreement by only 20% that legalising euthanasia would cause them to trust their personal physician less. The remainder were neutral. These attitudes were the same in men and women, but older people and black people had more agreement that euthanasia would lower trust. However, overall, only 27% of elderly people (age 65+) and 32% of black people thought that physician aid in dying would lower trust. These views differed with physical and mental health, and also with education and income, with those having more of these attributes tending to view physician aid in dying somewhat more favourably. Again, however, overall views in most of these subgroups were positive. Views about the effect of physician aid in dying on trust were significantly correlated with participants' underlying trust in their physicians and their satisfaction with care. In a multivariate regression model, trust, satisfaction, age, and white/black race remained independently significant. CONCLUSION: Despite the widespread concern that legalising physician aid in dying would seriously threaten or undermine trust in physicians, the weight of the evidence in the USA is to the contrary, although views vary significantly.     

河南省公众对安乐死的认知、态度及意向调查

目的：了解河南省公众对安乐死的认知、态度及意向,为在该人群中开展有针对性的知识宣传及相关部门采取相应措施提供参考依据。方法：针对河南省公众特点,自行编制＂河南省公众对自愿安乐死认知调查问卷＂,对1000位河南省公民进行调查,内容包括一般人口社会学特征,对安乐死的认知、态度及意向。结果：75.6%的被调查者对安乐死有一定了解,不同职业的被调查者对安乐死的认知差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）;50.3%的被调查者赞成安乐死,52.6%的被调查者赞成安乐死合法化,并且学历越高者越倾向于赞成安乐死合法化（P〈0.05）,医生的赞同率仅有36.8%。60.5%和58.8%的被调查者分别认为安乐死属于社会问题和伦理问题。结论：河南省公众对安乐死总体知晓率较高,多数人对实施安乐死和安乐死合法化持谨慎态度。普通公民应在现代医学伦理观的指导下正确看待安乐死。     

Euthanasia: above ground, below ground

The key to the euthanasia debate lies in how best to regulate what doctors do. Opponents of euthanasia frequently warn of the possible negative consequences of legalising physician assisted suicide and active euthanasia (PAS/AE) while ignoring the covert practice of PAS/AE by doctors and other health professionals. Against the background of survey studies suggesting that anything from 4% to 10% of doctors have intentionally assisted a patient to die, and interview evidence of the unregulated, idiosyncratic nature of underground PAS/AE, this paper assesses three alternatives to the current policy of prohibition. It argues that although legalisation may never succeed in making euthanasia perfectly safe, legalising PAS/AE may nevertheless be safer, and therefore a preferable policy alternative, to prohibition. At a minimum, debate about harm minimisation and the regulation of euthanasia needs to take account of PAS/AE wherever it is practised, both above and below ground.     

Alberta Euthanasia Survey: 3-year follow-up.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the opinions of Alberta physicians about active euthanasia had changed and to assess the determinants of potential changes in opinion. DESIGN: Follow-up survey (mailed questionnaire) of physicians included in the 1991 Alberta Euthanasia Survey. SETTING: Alberta. PARTICIPANTS: Of the 1391 physicians who participated in the 1991 survey 1291 (93%) had indicated that they were willing to take part in a follow-up survey. A follow-up questionnaire was mailed in 1994 to 1146 physicians who could be traced through the 1994 Medical Directory of the provincial college of physicians and surgeons; 25 questionnaires were returned because they could not be delivered. OUTCOME MEASURES: Physicians' opinions about (a) the morality of active euthanasia, (b) changes in the law to permit active euthanasia and (c) the practice of legalized euthanasia. RESULTS: Of the 1121 physicians sent a follow-up questionnaire 866 (77%) returned it completed. The responses of these same 866 physicians in 1991 provided a basis for comparison. Of the 866, 360 (42%) stated in the 1994 survey that it is sometimes right to practise active euthanasia; a similar proportion (384 [44%]) gave this response in 1991. However, other opinions changed significantly. In 1991, 250 of the respondents (29%) indicated that they would practise active euthanasia if it were legalized, as compared with 128 (15%) in 1994 (p < 0.01). In 1991, 429 (50%) of the respondents thought that the law should be changed to permit active euthanasia, as compared with 316 (37%) in 1994 (p < 0.01). Religious activity was the most important characteristic associated with changes in opinion. Despite the decrease in support for the practice and legalization of active euthanasia between 1991 and 1994, in both surveys at least 70% of those who responded to this question indicated that active euthanasia, if it were legalized, should be performed only by physicians and should be taught at medical sites. CONCLUSION: Alberta physicians' support for the practice and legalization of active euthanasia decreased considerably between 1991 and 1994. However, most physicians remain in favour of restricting active euthanasia, if it were legalized, to the medical profession. These results suggest a need for caution and deliberation when changes in the law concerning active euthanasia are examined.     

A role for doctors in assisted dying? An analysis of legal regulations and medical professional positions in six European countries

OBJECTIVES: To analyse legislation and medical professional positions concerning the doctor's role in assisted dying in western Europe, and to discuss their implications for doctors. METHOD: This paper is based on country-specific reports by experts from European countries where assisted dying is legalised (Belgium, The Netherlands), or openly practiced (Switzerland), or where it is illegal (Germany, Norway, UK). RESULTS: Laws on assisted dying in The Netherlands and Belgium are restricted to doctors. In principle, assisted suicide (but not euthanasia) is not illegal in either Germany or Switzerland, but a doctor's participation in Germany would violate the code of professional medical conduct and might contravene of a doctor's legal duty to save life. The Assisted Dying for the Terminally Ill Bill proposed in the UK in 2005 focused on doctors, whereas the Proposal on Assisted Dying of the Norwegian Penal Code Commission minority in 2002 did not. Professional medical organisations in all these countries except The Netherlands maintain the position that medical assistance in dying conflicts with the basic role of doctors. However, in Belgium and Switzerland, and for a time in the UK, these organisations dropped their opposition to new legislation. Today, they regard the issue as primarily a matter for society and politics. This "neutral" stance differs from the official position of the Royal Dutch Medical Association which has played a key role in developing the Dutch practice of euthanasia as a "medical end-of-life decision" since the 1970s. CONCLUSION: A society moving towards an open approach to assisted dying should carefully identify tasks to assign exclusively to medical doctors, and distinguish those possibly better performed by other professions.     

Voluntary euthanasia under control? Further empirical evidence from The Netherlands.

Nineteen ninety-six saw the publication of a major Dutch survey into euthanasia in the Netherlands. This paper outlines the main statistical findings of this survey and considers whether it shows that voluntary euthanasia is under effective control in the Netherlands. The paper concludes that although there has been some improvement in compliance with procedural requirements, the practice of voluntary euthanasia remains beyond effective control.     

医学生与医务人员对安乐死的认识和评价调查

采用问郑调查方法调查了４０１名医学生与医务人员对安乐死的认识与接受程度。结果 赞成安乐死的占９０．７７％,其主要理由是认为安乐死是人道的,可以帮助患者及其家属解脱痛苦。认为最佳安尔死方式的,有３２．０３％造反主动安乐死,只有１８．１３％选择被动安乐死。６６．２９％的安尔死造成者对于安乐死的态度存在理智上与感情上的矛盾心理。法制不健全和传统习俗的影响被认为是安乐死的所面临的两大障碍。     

A case for justified non-voluntary active euthanasia: exploring the ethics of the Groningen Protocol

One of the most recent controversies to arise in the field of bioethics concerns the ethics for the Groningen Protocol: the guidelines proposed by the Groningen Academic Hospital in The Netherlands, which would permit doctors to actively euthanise terminally ill infants who are suffering. The Groningen Protocol has been met with an intense amount of criticism, some even calling it a relapse into a Hitleresque style of eugenics, where people with disabilities are killed solely because of their handicaps. The purpose of this paper is threefold. First, the paper will attempt to disabuse readers of this erroneous understanding of the Groningen Protocol by showing how such a policy does not aim at making quality-of-life judgements, given that it restricts euthanasia to suffering and terminally ill infants. Second, the paper illustrates that what the Groningen Protocol proposes to do is both ethical and also the most humane alternative for these suffering and dying infants. Lastly, responses are given to some of the worries expressed by ethicists on the practice of any type of non-voluntary active euthanasia.     

What people close to death say about euthanasia and assisted suicide: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVE: To explore the experiences of people with a "terminal illness", focusing on the patients' perspective of euthanasia and assisted suicide. METHOD: A qualitative study using narrative interviews was conducted throughout the UK. The views of the 18 people who discussed euthanasia and assisted suicide were explored. These were drawn from a maximum variation sample, who said that they had a "terminal" illness, malignant or non-malignant. RESULTS: That UK law should be changed to allow assisted suicide or voluntary euthanasia was felt strongly by most people. Those who had seen others die were particularly convinced that this should be a right. Some had multiple reasons, including pain and anticipated pain, fear of indignity, loss of control and cognitive impairment. Those who did not want to be a burden also had other reasons for wanting euthanasia. Suicide was contemplated by a few, who would have preferred a change in the law to allow them to end their lives with medical help and in the company of family or friends. The few who opposed a change in UK law, or who felt ambivalent, focused on involuntary euthanasia, cited religious reasons or worried that new legislation might be open to abuse. CONCLUSION: Qualitative research conducted on people who know they are nearing death is an important addition to the international debate on euthanasia and assisted suicide. Those who had seen others die were particularly convinced that the law should be changed to allow assisted death.     

Doctors' and nurses' attitudes towards and experiences of voluntary euthanasia: survey of members of the Japanese Association of Palliative Medicine

OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate Japanese doctors' and nurses' attitudes towards and practices of voluntary euthanasia (VE) and to compare their attitudes and practices in this regard. DESIGN: Postal survey, conducted between October and December 1999, using a self-administered questionnaire. PARTCIPANTS: All doctor members and nurse members of the Japanese Association of Palliative Medicine. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Doctors' and nurses' attitude towards and practices of VE. RESULTS: We received 366 completed questionnaires from 642 doctors surveyed (response rate, 58%) and 145 from 217 nurses surveyed (68%). A total of 54% (95% confidence interval (CI): 49-59) of the responding doctors and 53% (CI: 45-61) of the responding nurses had been asked by patients to hasten death, of whom 5% (CI: 2-8) of the former and none of the latter had taken active steps to bring about death. Although 88% (CI: 83-92) of the doctors and 85% (CI: 77-93) of the nurses answered that a patient's request to hasten death can sometimes be rational, only 33% (CI: 28-38) and 23% (CI: 16-30) respectively regarded VE as ethically right and 22% (CI: 18-36) and 15% (CI: 8-20) respectively would practise VE if it were legal. Logistic regression model analysis showed that the respondents' profession was not a statistically independent factor predicting his or her response to any question regarding attitudes towards VE. CONCLUSIONS: A minority of responding doctors and nurses thought VE was ethically or legally acceptable. There seems no significant difference in attitudes towards VE between the doctors and nurses. However, only doctors had practised VE.     

Attitudes of Finnish doctors towards euthanasia in 1993 and 2003

Questionnaire studies on the attitudes of Finnish doctors towards euthanasia were conducted in 1993 and 2003, and the results show that they have not become more positive.The attitudes of doctors towards active euthanasia are, in general, more negative than the attitudes of the general public. The interpretations of surveys are, however, highly dependent on the formulation of the questions and, although the questions posed to these groups are similar, it is probable that the interpretations of doctors differ from those of the general public.According to most studies, most doctors, except those from The Netherlands, are against legalisation on active euthanasia. Considerable variation exists in the percentage of doctors opposing the practice. The variation is, of course, partly because of the variation in opinion, but several methodological issues also explain it. Some studies have asked direct questions about the legalisation of euthanasia—for example, in others, the questions have been about the ethical acceptance of the practice. Some studies have used case vignettes, whereas others have used general questionnaires. The knowledge and availability of palliative care may also affect the answers.¹The definition of euthanasia is of particular importance in the studies. The distinction between passive euthanasia (ie, withholding or withdrawing life‐saving treatment) and active euthanasia (ie, deliberately terminating the life of the patient with a lethal drug, for example,) has not always been clear.Although numerous studies with different methods have focused on the attitudes of doctors towards euthanasia and other practices at the end of life, we lack knowledge on possible changes in these attitudes. Legal changes in The Netherlands and Belgium, and open public discussion on these issues, most recently in the Council of Europe (http://assembly.coe.int/Documents/WorkingDocs/Doc03/EDOC9898.htm), may lead us to think that the attitudes of doctors have also become more positive. This study determined whether such a change had taken place in Finland.     

护理大专生对安乐死的态度及意向调查分析

目的 了解护理大专生对安乐死的态度及意向情况,为护理伦理教育提供参考依据.方法 采用自行设计的问卷对长沙市某职业学院的护理大专三年级全体学生共350人进行现场自填式问卷调查.结果 350名护理大专生中,64.9%的学生赞同安乐死,70%的护生表示如果自己患不治之症愿意选择安乐死,如果亲人要求安乐死,45.1%的护生会同意,绝大部分护生认为安乐死应该合法化.而对于对濒临死亡患者实施主动安乐死和被动安乐死的回答,持反对态度者（44.3%和64.8%）均多于持赞同态度者（31.1%和13.7%）.男女生在是否同意亲人安乐死方面存在差异（P〈0.05）,不同家庭住址的学生在是否支持亲人安乐死、是否赞同主动安乐死和被动安乐死方面存在差异（均P〈0.05）,而是否学习过〈护理伦理学〉课程的学生除了在是否支持亲人安乐死方面无差异外,其他方面均有差异（均P〈0.05）.结论 绝大多数护理大专生支持安乐死,且对安乐死意向较明确.应加强对其护理伦理学的教学,积极正确引导护生,使护生对安乐死有科学的认识.     

Conditions required for a law on active voluntary euthanasia: a survey of nurses' opinions in the Australian Capital Territory

OBJECTIVES: To ascertain which conditions nurses believe should be in a law allowing active voluntary euthanasia (AVE). DESIGN: Survey questionnaire posted to registered nurses (RNs). SETTING: Australian Capital Territory (ACT) at the end of 1996, when active voluntary euthanasia was legal in the Northern Territory. SURVEY SAMPLE: A random sample of 2,000 RNs, representing 54 per cent of the RN population in the ACT. MAIN MEASURES: Two methods were used to look at nurses' opinions. The first involved four vignettes which varied in terms of critical characteristics of each patient who was requesting help to die. The respondents were asked if the law should be changed to allow any of these requests. There was also a checklist of conditions, most of which have commonly been included in Australian proposed laws on AVE. The respondents chose those which they believed should apply in a law on AVE. RESULTS: The response rate was 61%. Support for a change in the law to allow AVE was 38% for a young man with AIDS, 39% for an elderly man with early stage Alzheimer's disease, 44% for a young woman who had become quadriplegic and 71% for a middle-aged woman with metastases from breast cancer. The conditions most strongly supported in any future AVE law were: "second doctor's opinion", "cooling off period", "unbearable protracted suffering", "patient fully informed about illness and treatment" and "terminally ill". There was only minority support for "not suffering from treatable depression", "administer the fatal dose themselves" and "over a certain age". CONCLUSION: Given the lack of support for some conditions included in proposed AVE laws, there needs to be further debate about the conditions required in any future AVE bills.     

The body as unwarranted life support: a new perspective on euthanasia

It is widely accepted in clinical ethics that removing a patient from a ventilator at the patient's request is ethically permissible. This constitutes voluntary passive euthanasia. However, voluntary active euthanasia, such as giving a patient a lethal overdose with the intention of ending that patient's life, is ethically proscribed, as is assisted suicide, such as providing a patient with lethal pills or a lethal infusion. Proponents of voluntary active euthanasia and assisted suicide have argued that the distinction between killing and letting die is flawed and that there is no real difference between actively ending someone's life and "merely" allowing them to die. This paper shows that, although this view is correct, there is even less of a distinction than is commonly acknowledged in the literature. It does so by suggesting a new perspective that more accurately reflects the moral features of end-of-life situations: if a patient is mentally competent and wants to die, his body itself constitutes unwarranted life support unfairly prolonging his or her mental life.     

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.