Debating Euthanasia and Physician-Assisted Death in People with Psychiatric Disorders.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Over the last 30 years, medical assistance in dying (MAiD) including euthanasia (EU) and physician-assisted death (or suicide, PAS) has become the center of a large debate, particularly when these practices have involved people with psychiatric illness, including resistant depression, schizophrenia, personality, or other severe psychiatric disorders. We performed a review utilizing several databases, and by including the most relevant studies in full journal articles investigating the problem of MAiD in patients with psychiatric disorders but not in physical terminal conditions (non-terminal, MAiD-NT). RECENT FINDINGS: Literature has shown that a small percentage of people with psychiatric disorders died by MAiD-NT in comparison with patients with somatic diseases in terminal clinical conditions (e.g., cancer, AIDS). However, the problem in the field is complex and not solved yet as confirmed by the fact that only a few countries (e.g., the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxemburg) have legalized MAiD-NT for patients with psychiatric disorders, while most have maintained the practices accessible only to people with somatic disease in a terminal phase. Also, how to make objective the criterion of irremediability of a mental disorder; how to balance suicide prevention with assisted suicide; how to avoid the risk of progressively including in requests for MAiD-NT vulnerable segments of the population, such as minors, elderly, or people with dementia, in a productive-oriented society, are some of the critical points to be discussed. The application of MAiD-NT in people with psychiatric disorders should be further explored to prevent end-of-life rights from contradicting the principles of recovery-oriented care.

The right not to know: the case of psychiatric disorders.

This paper will consider the right not to know in the context of psychiatric disorders. It will outline the arguments for and against acquiring knowledge about the results of genetic testing for conditions such as breast cancer and Huntington's disease, and examine whether similar considerations apply to disclosing to clients the results of genetic testing for psychiatric disorders such as depression and Alzheimer's disease. The right not to know will also be examined in the context of the diagnosis of psychiatric disorders that are associated with stigma or for which there is no effective treatment.

An ethical framework for stem cell research in the European Union.

The European Union is a nightmare from the perspective of the ethics and regulation of science. A hitherto insoluble problem has been the task of drafting ethical principles which do not founder on the radically different attitudes taken to the question of the moral status of the human embryo. Following the conclusions reached in an international project, EUROSTEM, we suggest that this problem can be solved by concentration on the scope of principles and we emphasize that European research should be funded in a way that does not discriminate between individual states and researchers in the EU. Finally, we observe that the availability of any eventual embryonic stem cell therapies will pose a dilemma for those countries and those people that have declared stem cell research to be unacceptable.