Legal provisions on medical aid in dying encode moral intuition.

In recent decades, many jurisdictions have moved toward legalizing euthanasia and assisted suicide, alongside a near-universal increase in public acceptance of medical aid in dying. Here, we draw on a comprehensive quantitative review of current laws on assisted dying, experimental survey evidence, and four decades of time-series data to explore the relationship between these legislative transitions and change in moral attitudes. Our analyses reveal that existing laws on medical aid in dying impose a common set of eligibility restrictions, based on the patient's age, decision-making capacity, prognosis, and the nature of their illness. Fulfillment of these eligibility criteria elevates public moral approval of physician-assisted death, equally in countries with (i.e., Spain) and without (i.e., the United Kingdom) assisted dying laws. Finally, historical records of public attitudes toward euthanasia across numerous countries uncovered anticipatory growth in moral approval leading up to legalization, but no accelerated growth thereafter. Taken together, our findings suggest that the enactment of medical aid in dying laws, and their specific provisions, crystallize patterns in moral intuition.

The Hippocratic Oath: Misreading and Rereading an Ancient Text.

The Hippocratic oath is such an enduring icon of medical morality that physicians in Nazi Germany invoked it to protest Euthanasie, the systematized killing of weak or sick children, people with incurable diseases, hospitalized criminals (a category applicable to gays), geriatric patients, long-term patients, patients not of German blood (Jews and Romani), and people with disabilities. Several expert witnesses at the 1945 Nuremberg Medical Trial also cited the oath to condemn Nazi physicians' abuse of human research subjects. Noting these invocations, in 1947 the physicians who founded the World Medical Association modernized the Hippocratic oath to convey to future medical students its foundational precepts: benefitting the sick, not harming them, not breaching confidentiality, and not treating patients unjustly, irrespective of their gender or social status. This article presents a historically accurate reading of the oath's strange-seeming passages to show that it does not prohibit abortion, euthanasia (medical aid in dying), or surgery. The article also contends that oath-swearing remains an important asset in teaching clinicians their role responsibilities, and that its ethics supports women's rights to reproductive health care and can valorize challenges to venture-capitalist and for-profit managements that prioritize profitability over providing quality health care for patients.

Euthanasia and End-of-Life Decisions: From the Empirical Turn to Moral Intuitionism.

Most medical learned societies have endorsed both "equivalence" between all forms of withholding or withdrawing treatment and the "discontinuity" between euthanasia and practices to withhold or withdraw treatment. While the latter are morally acceptable insofar as they consist in letting the patient die, the former constitutes an illegitimate act of actively interfering with a patient's life. The moral distinction between killing and letting die has been hotly debated both conceptually and empirically, most notably by experimental philosophers, with inconclusive results. This article employs a "revisionary" intuititionist perspective to discuss the results of a clinical ethics study about intensivists' perceptions of withhold or withdraw decisions. The results show that practitioners' moral experience is at odds with both the discontinuity and equivalence theses. This outcome allows us to revisit certain concepts, such as intention and causal relationship, that are prominent in the conceptual debate. Intensivists also regard end-of-life decisions as being on a scale from least to most active, and whether they regard active forms of end-of-life decisions as ethically acceptable depends on the overarching professional values they endorse: the patient's best chances of survival, or the patient's quality of life.

Euthanasia in detention and the ethics of caring solidarity: A case study of the 'Tarragona Gunman'.

Almost a year after the enactment of the law regulating euthanasia in Spain, public opinion was shocked to learn that a defendant in criminal proceedings obtained medical assistance in dying following injuries sustained in an exchange of gunfire with the police after having committed a series of severe crimes. Although there are very few cases in the world where prisoners have received euthanasia, the one we will discuss in this article is the only known case where both the public prosecutor's office and the private prosecutors judicially opposed the defendant's euthanasia. This article aims to offer a new perspective on the ethical legitimacy of detainees' access to euthanasia: the ethics of caring solidarity. To do this, we will first place the case in its legal context. Subsequently, we will address the two main arguments proposed in the literature to justify euthanasia in detention: respect for the autonomy of the detainee and the principle of equivalence of care. Finally, after having identified serious shortcomings in both arguments, we will argue that the perspective of caring solidarity offers a better ethical basis for people in detention's access to euthanasia.

Best to possibly not be: A prudential argument for antinatalism.

This article starts by examining the present state of death ethics by attending to the euthanasia debate. Given that voluntary active euthanasia has seen strong support in the academic community, insights on the choiceworthiness of continued existence may be derived. Having derived cases of choiceworthy nonexistence (which I refer to as choiceworthy nonexistence [CNE] cases), I extend these intuitions to lives not worth starting, or choiceworthy nonexistence for potential people (which I refer to as foetal-CNE, or fCNE cases). Although I depart from Benatarian antinatalism by rejecting Benatar's claim that all existence is necessarily a harm, I posit a weaker argument that all existence is likely a harm since we cannot know until later in life if an existence is a harm. If I am right, then we have prudential reasons not to bear children, since they are more likely to suffer in lives not worth living than not.

Facing a request for assisted death - views of Finnish physicians, a mixed method study.

BACKGROUND: Assisted death, including euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide (PAS), is under debate worldwide, and these practices are adopted in many Western countries. Physicians' attitudes toward assisted death vary across the globe, but little is known about physicians' actual reactions when facing a request for assisted death. There is a clear gap in evidence on how physicians act and respond to patients' requests for assisted death in countries where these actions are not legal. METHODS: A survey including statements concerning euthanasia and PAS and an open question about their actions when facing a request for assisted death was sent to all Finnish physicians. Quantitative data are presented as numbers and percentages. Statistical significance was tested by using the Pearson chi-square test, when appropriate. The qualitative analysis was performed by using an inductive content analysis approach, where categories emerge from the data. RESULTS: Altogether, 6889 physicians or medical students answered the survey, yielding a response rate of 26%. One-third of participants agreed or partly agreed that they could assist a patient in a suicide. The majority (69%) of the participants fully or partly agreed that euthanasia should only be accepted due to difficult physical symptoms, while 12% fully or partly agreed that life turning into a burden should be an acceptable reason for euthanasia. Of the participants, 16% had faced a request for euthanasia or PAS, and 3033 answers from 2565 respondents were achieved to the open questions concerning their actions regarding the request and ethical aspects of assisted death. In the qualitative analysis, six main categories, including 22 subcategories, were formed regarding the phenomenon of how physicians act when facing this request. The six main categories were as follows: providing an alternative to the request, enabling care and support, ignoring the request, giving a reasoned refusal, complying with the request, and seeing the request as a possibility. CONCLUSIONS: Finnish physicians' actions regarding the requests for assisted death, and attitudes toward euthanasia and PAS vary substantially. Open discussion, education, and recommendations concerning a request for assisted death and ethics around it are also highly needed in countries where euthanasia and PAS are not legal.

Ethical perspectives regarding Euthanasia, including in the context of adult psychiatry: a qualitative interview study among healthcare workers in Belgium.

INTRODUCTION: Previous research has explored euthanasia's ethical dimensions, primarily focusing on general practice and, to a lesser extent, psychiatry, mainly from the viewpoints of physicians and nurses. However, a gap exists in understanding the comprehensive value-based perspectives of other professionals involved in both somatic and psychiatric euthanasia. This paper aims to analyze the interplay among legal, medical, and ethical factors to clarify how foundational values shape the ethical discourse surrounding euthanasia in both somatic and psychiatric contexts. It seeks to explore these dynamics among all healthcare professionals and volunteers in Belgium. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 30 Dutch-speaking healthcare workers who had encountered patients requesting euthanasia for psychiatric conditions, in Belgium, from August 2019 to August 2020. Qualitative thematic analysis was applied to the interview transcripts. FINDINGS: Participants identified three pivotal values and virtues: religious values, professional values, and fundamental medical values encompassing autonomy, beneficence, and non-maleficence, linked to compassion, quality care, and justice. These values interwove across four tiers: the patient, the patient's inner circle, the medical realm, and society at large. Irrespective of their euthanasia stance, participants generally displayed a blend of ethical values across these tiers. Their euthanasia perspective was primarily shaped by value interpretation, significance allocation to key components, and tier weighting. Explicit mention of varying ethical values, potentially indicating distinct stances in favor of or against euthanasia, was infrequent. CONCLUSION: The study underscores ethical discourse's central role in navigating euthanasia's intricate landscape. Fostering inclusive dialogue, bridging diverse values, supports informed decision-making, nurturing justice, and empathy. Tailored end-of-life healthcare in psychiatry is essential, acknowledging all involved actors' needs. The study calls for interdisciplinary research to comprehensively grasp euthanasia's multifaceted dimensions, and guiding policy evolution. While contextualized in Belgium, the implications extend to the broader euthanasia discourse, suggesting avenues for further inquiry and cross-cultural exploration.

Is Cryocide an Ethically Feasible Alternative to Euthanasia?

While some countries are moving toward legalization, euthanasia is still criticized on various fronts. Most importantly, it is considered a violation of the medical ethics principle of non-maleficence, because it actively seeks a patient's death. But, medical ethicists should consider an ethical alternative to euthanasia. In this article, we defend cryocide as one such alternative. Under this procedure, with the consent of terminally-ill patients, their clinical death is induced, in order to prevent the further advance of their brain's deterioration. Their body is then cryogenically preserved, in the hope that in the future, there will be a technology to reanimate it. This prospect is ethically distinct from euthanasia if a different criterion of death is assumed. In the information-theoretic criterion of death, a person is not considered dead when brain and cardiopulmonary functions cease, but rather, when information constituting psychology and memory is lost.

The ongoing discussion on termination of life on request. A review from a German/European perspective.

BACKGROUND: Interest in the topic of termination of life has been growing for 2 decades. After legalisation of active euthanasia and assisted suicide (EAS) in the Netherlands in 2002, movements to implement similar laws started in other European countries. However, many people objected to legalisation on the basis of the experiences in the Netherlands and as a matter of principal. METHODS: This selected and focussed review presents the theoretical discussions about EAS and describes the respective parliamentary discussions in Germany and the data and experiences in the Netherlands. It also considers people with mental disorders in the context of termination-of-life services. RESULTS: So far, only a few European countries have introduced legislation on EAS. Legalisation of EAS in the Netherlands resulted in an unexpectedly large increase in cases. The number of people with mental disorders who terminate their lives on request remains low. CONCLUSIONS: Experience from the Netherlands shows that widening criteria for EAS has problematic consequences.KEY POINTSTermination of life on request, which a subgroup of people support, is a matter of ongoing debate.Because of several problematic aspects, including ethical considerations, only a few countries in the world allow active euthanasia or assisted suicide.Even if euthanasia is well regulated, legalising it can have problematic consequences that are difficult to control, such as an unwanted excessive increase in euthanasia cases.The well-documented experiences with the euthanasia law in the Netherlands serve as an example of what is to be expected when euthanasia is legalised.We need to pay close attention to the relationship between suicide and suicide prevention on the one hand and euthanasia acts and promotion of euthanasia on the other.Further ethical, psychological and legal research is needed. In particular, the role of palliative medicine in societies' approach to end-of-life care must be explored in much more detail.

Should euthanasia and assisted suicide for psychiatric disorders be permitted? A systematic review of reasons.

BACKGROUND: Euthanasia and assisted suicide (EAS) based on a psychiatric disorder (psychiatric EAS) continue to pose ethical and policy challenges, even in countries where the practice has been allowed for years. We conducted a systematic review of reasons, a specific type of review for bioethical questions designed to inform rational policy-making. Our aims were twofold: (1) to systematically identify all published reasons for and against the practice (2) to identify current gaps in the debate and areas for future research. METHODS: Following the PRISMA guidelines, we performed a search across seven electronic databases to include publications focusing on psychiatric EAS and providing ethical reasons. Reasons were grouped into domains by qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: We included 42 articles, most of which were written after 2013. Articles in favor and against were evenly distributed. Articles in favor were mostly full-length pieces written by non-clinicians, with articles against mostly reactive, commentary-type pieces written by clinicians. Reasons were categorized into eight domains: (1) mental and physical illness and suffering (2) decisional capacity (3) irremediability (4) goals of medicine and psychiatry (5) consequences for mental health care (6) psychiatric EAS and suicide (7) self-determination and authenticity (8) psychiatric EAS and refusal of life-sustaining treatment. Parity- (or discrimination-) based reasons were dominant across domains, mostly argued for by non-clinicians, while policy reasons were mostly pointed to by clinicians. CONCLUSIONS: The ethical debate about psychiatric EAS is relatively young, with prominent reasons of parity. More direct engagement is needed to address ethical and policy considerations.

First prosecution of a Dutch doctor since the Euthanasia Act of 2002: what does the verdict mean?

On 11 September 2019, the verdict was read in the first prosecution of a doctor for euthanasia since the Termination of Life on Request and Assisted Suicide (Review Procedures) Act of 2002 was installed in the Netherlands. The case concerned euthanasia on the basis of an advance euthanasia directive (AED) for a patient with severe dementia. In this paper we describe the review process for euthanasia cases in the Netherlands. Then we describe the case in detail, the judgement of the Regional Review Committees for Termination of Life on Request and Euthanasia (RTE) and the judgement of the medical disciplinary court. Both the review committees and the disciplinary court came to the conclusion there were concerns with this case, which mainly hinged on the wording of the AED. They also addressed the lack of communication with the patient, the absence of oral confirmation of the wish to die and the fact that the euthanasia was performed without the patient being aware of this. However, the doctor was acquitted by the criminal court as the court found she had in fact met all due care criteria laid down in the act. We then describe what this judgement means for euthanasia in the Netherlands. It clarifies the power and reach of AEDs, it allows taking conversations with physicians and the testimony of the family into account when interpreting the AED. However, as a practical consequence the prosecution of this physician has led to fear among doctors about prosecution after euthanasia.

'Alive by default': An exploration of Velleman's unfair burdens argument against state sanctioned euthanasia.

In this article we critically evaluate an argument against state-sanctioned euthanasia made by David Velleman in his 1992 paper 'Against the right to die'. In that article, Velleman argues that legalizing euthanasia is morally problematic as it will deprive eligible patients of the opportunity of staying 'alive by default'. That is to say, those patients who are rendered eligible for euthanasia as a result of legislative reform will face the burden of having to justify their continued existence to their epistemic peers if they are to be perceived as 'reasonable'. We discuss potential criticisms that could be made of the argument, and consider how a defender of the view might respond. Velleman's argument is particularly interesting as it is a consequentialist argument against state-sanctioned euthanasia, challenging the many consequentialist arguments that have been made in favour of legalizing the procedure. We conclude by suggesting that further research on the question of unfair burdens is important to adequately evaluating the potential harms of legalizing euthanasia for patients at the end of life.

How do people use 'killing', 'letting die' and related bioethical concepts? Contrasting descriptive and normative hypotheses.

Bioethicists involved in end-of-life debates routinely distinguish between 'killing' and 'letting die'. Meanwhile, previous work in cognitive science has revealed that when people characterize behaviour as either actively 'doing' or passively 'allowing', they do so not purely on descriptive grounds, but also as a function of the behaviour's perceived morality. In the present report, we extend this line of research by examining how medical students and professionals (N = 184) and laypeople (N = 122) describe physicians' behaviour in end-of-life scenarios. We show that the distinction between 'ending' a patient's life and 'allowing' it to end arises from morally motivated causal selection. That is, when a patient wishes to die, her illness is treated as the cause of death and the doctor is seen as merely allowing her life to end. In contrast, when a patient does not wish to die, the doctor's behaviour is treated as the cause of death and, consequently, the doctor is described as ending the patient's life. This effect emerged regardless of whether the doctor's behaviour was omissive (as in withholding treatment) or commissive (as in applying a lethal injection). In other words, patient consent shapes causal selection in end-of-life situations, and in turn determines whether physicians are seen as 'killing' patients, or merely as 'enabling' their death.

"It is still intense and not unambiguous." Nurses' experiences in the euthanasia care process 15 years after legalisation.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To explore how Flemish nurses working in hospitals and home care experience their involvement in the care of patients requesting euthanasia 15 years after the legalisation of euthanasia. BACKGROUND: Euthanasia was legalised in Belgium in 2002. Despite prior research that charted the experiences of nurses in euthanasia care before and right after legalisation in Belgium, it remains unclear how Flemish nurses currently, 15 years after the legalisation, experience their involvement. DESIGN: A grounded theory design, using semi-structured in-depth interviews. METHODS: We interviewed 26 nurses working in hospitals or in home care, who had experience with caring for patients requesting euthanasia. Data were collected using a purposive sample and then a snowball sample. Data collection and data analysis were conducted simultaneously. Data were analysed by using the Qualitative Analysis Guide of Leuven. The study adhered to the COREQ guidelines. RESULTS: Caring for a patient requesting euthanasia continues to be an intense experience characterised by ambivalence. The nature of euthanasia itself contributes to the intensity of this care process. The nurses described euthanasia as something unnatural and planned that generated many questions and doubts. Nevertheless, most interviewees stated that they were able to contribute to a dignified end of life and make a difference, giving them a profound feeling of professional fulfilment. However, when nurses were not able to contribute to good euthanasia care, they struggled with strong negative feelings and frustrations. CONCLUSION: Although the results suggest some subtle shifts in nurses' experiences over time, they do not indicate perceptions of euthanasia as a normal practice by the nurses involved. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: The study reveals the need for more clarification of nurses' ethical responsibility in euthanasia care and their role as moral agents.

To relieve or to terminate? A Confucian ethical reflection on the use of morphine for late-stage cancer patients in China.

Morphine is usually preferred to treat moderate or severe pain for late-stage cancer patients. However, medically unindicated or excessive morphine use may result in respiratory depression and death. This essay contends that a clear distinction between relieving pain and performing active euthanasia in the use of morphine should be made in practice. By drawing on Confucian virtue resources, we construct a Confucian conception of human dignity, including both intrinsic and acquired dignity, to analyze the circumstances of morphine use in current China. We argue that not only the Confucian view of intrinsic dignity but also that of acquired dignity would not support morphine euthanasia.

Pathocentric Health Care and a Minimal Internal Morality of Medicine.

Christopher Boorse is very skeptical of there being a pathocentric internal morality of medicine. Boorse argues that doctors have always engaged in activities other than healing, and so no internal morality of medicine can provide objections to euthanasia, contraception, sterilization, and other practices not aimed at fighting pathologies. Objections to these activities have to come from outside of medicine. I first argue that Boorse fails to appreciate that such widespread practices are compatible with medicine being essentially pathocentric. Then I contend that the pathocentric essence, properly understood, does not prohibit physicians from engaging in actions that are not aimed at combating pathologies, but rather supports an internal morality of medicine that allows medical providers to refuse without penalty to engage in practices that promote pathologies.

Nursing and euthanasia: A narrative review of the nursing ethics literature.

BACKGROUND: Medical Assistance in Dying, also known as euthanasia or assisted suicide, is expanding internationally. Canada is the first country to permit Nurse Practitioners to provide euthanasia. These developments highlight the need for nurses to reflect upon the moral and ethical issues that euthanasia presents for nursing practice. PURPOSE: The purpose of this article is to provide a narrative review of the ethical arguments surrounding euthanasia in relationship to nursing practice. METHODS: Systematic search and narrative review. Nine electronic databases were searched using vocabulary developed from a stage 1 search of Medline and CINAHL. Articles that analysed a focused ethical question related to euthanasia in the context of nursing practice were included. Articles were synthesized to provide an overview of the literature of nursing ethics and euthanasia. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS: This review was conducted as per established scientific guidelines. We have tried to be fair and respectful to the authors discussed. FINDINGS: Forty-three articles were identified and arranged inductively into four themes: arguments from the nature of nursing; arguments from ethical principles, concepts and theories; arguments for moral consistency; and arguments from the nature of the social good. Key considerations included nursing's moral ontology, the nurse-patient relationship, potential impact on the profession, ethical principles and theories, moral culpability for acts versus omissions, the role of intention and the nature of the society in which euthanasia would be enacted. In many cases, the same assumptions, values, principles and theories were used to argue both for and against euthanasia. DISCUSSION: The review identified a relative paucity of literature in light of the expansion of euthanasia internationally. However, the literature provided a fulsome range of positions for nurses to consider as they reflect on their own participation in euthanasia. Many of the arguments reviewed were not nursing-specific, but rather are relevant across healthcare disciplines. Arguments explicitly grounded within the nature of nursing and nurse-patient relationships warrant further exploration.

Euthanasia, medically assisted dying or assisted suicide: time for psychiatrists to say no.

OBJECTIVE: Euthanasia has been considered unethical for most of the history of medicine. Recently it has been legalised in some countries, including parts of Australasia. We describe the recent history of euthanasia, paying attention to the extension of criteria that impact on the poor, elderly and vulnerable members of society in countries that currently have legalised this. In four of the five countries where euthanasia is legalised, there have been extensions of its criteria, either by revision of legislation or changes in practice. CONCLUSIONS: We suggest that this dynamic can be halted by international agreements of medical societies to shun involvement in euthanasia, as has been the case with other legal interventions that stigmatise. We may, as we have in the past, need to work collectively to meet this ethical challenge.

Indeterminacy of identity and advance directives for death after dementia.

A persistent question in discussions of the ethics of advance directives for euthanasia is whether patients who go through deep psychological changes retain their identity. Rather than seek an account of identity that answers this question, I argue that responsible policy should directly address indeterminacy about identity directly. Three sorts of indeterminacy are distinguished. Two of these-epistemic indeterminacy and metaphysical indeterminacy-should be addressed in laws/policies regarding advance directives for euthanasia.

To die well: the phenomenology of suffering and end of life ethics.

The paper presents an account of suffering as a multi-level phenomenon based on concepts such as mood, being-in-the-world and core life value. This phenomenological account will better allow us to evaluate the hardships associated with dying and thereby assist health care professionals in helping persons to die in the best possible manner. Suffering consists not only in physical pain but in being unable to do basic things that are considered to bestow meaning on one's life. The suffering can also be related to no longer being able to be the person one wants to be in the eyes of others, to losing one's dignity and identity. These three types of suffering become articulated by a narrative that holds together and bestows meaning on the whole life and identity of the dying person. In the encounter with the patient, the health-care professional attempts to understand the suffering-experience of the patient in an empathic and dialogic manner, in addition to exploring what has gone wrong in the patient's body. Matters of physician assisted suicide and/or euthanasia-if it should be legalized and if so under which conditions-need to be addressed by understanding the different levels of human suffering and its positive counterpart, human flourishing, rather than stressing the respect for patient autonomy and no-harm principles, only. In this phenomenological analysis the notions of vulnerability and togetherness, ultimately connecting to the political-philosophical issues of how we live together and take care of each other in a community, need to be scrutinized.