Euthanasia in advanced dementia; the view of the general practitioners in the Netherlands on a vignette case along the juridical and ethical dispute.

BACKGROUND: In the Netherlands, euthanasia has been regulated by law since 2002. In the past decade, a growing number of persons with dementia requested for euthanasia, and more requests were granted. A euthanasia request from a patient with advanced dementia (PWAD) can have a major impact on a general practitioner (GP). We aimed to get insights in the views of Dutch GPs on euthanasia concerning this patient group. METHODS: A postal survey was sent to 894 Dutch GPs. Questions were asked about a case vignette about a PWAD who was not able to confirm previous wishes anymore. Quantitative data were analyzed with descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Of the 894 GPs approached, 422 (47.3%) completed the survey. One hundred seventy-eight GPs (42.2%) did not agree with the statement that an Advance Euthanasia Directive (AED) can replace an oral request if communication with the patient concerned has become impossible. About half of the respondents (209; 49.5%) did not agree that the family can initiate a euthanasia trajectory, 95 GPs (22.5%) would accept such a family initiative and 110 GPs (26.1%) would under certain conditions. DISCUSSION: In case of a PWAD, when confirming previous wishes is not possible anymore, about half of the Dutch GPs would not accept an AED to replace verbal or non-verbal conformation nor consider performing euthanasia; a minority would. Our study shows that, probably due to the public debate and changed professional guidelines, conflicting views have arisen among Dutch GPs about interpretation of moral, ethical values considering AED and PWADs.

Dutch GPs' experience of burden by euthanasia requests from people with dementia: a quantitative survey.

BACKGROUND: In the Netherlands during the past decade, a growing number of people with dementia requested euthanasia, and each year more of such requests were granted. AIM: To obtain quantitative insights into the problems and needs of GPs when confronted with a euthanasia request by a person with dementia. DESIGN & SETTING: A concept survey was composed for GPs in the Netherlands. Expert validity of the survey was achieved through pilot testing. METHOD: A postal survey was sent to a random sample of 900 Dutch GPs, regardless of their opinion on, or practical experience with, euthanasia. Collected data were analysed with descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Of 894 GPs, 423 (47.3%) completed the survey, of whom 176 (41.6%) had experience with euthanasia requests from people with dementia. Emotional burden was reported most frequently (n = 86; 52.8%), as well as feeling uncertain about the mental competence of the person with dementia (n = 77; 47.2%), pressure by relatives (n = 70; 42.9%) or the person with dementia (n = 56; 34.4%), and uncertainty about handling advance euthanasia directives (AEDs) (n = 43; 26.4%). GPs would appreciate more support from the following: a support and consultation in euthanasia in the Netherlands (SCEN) physician (an independent physician for support, information, and formal consultation around euthanasia) (n = 291; 68. 8%); a geriatric consultation team (n = 185; 43.7%); the end-of-life clinic (n = 184; 43.5%); or a palliative care consultation team (n = 179; 42.3%). Surprisingly the need for moral deliberation was hardly mentioned. CONCLUSION: The reported burden and the rise in numbers and complexity of euthanasia requests from people with dementia warrants primary care support. There needs to be easier access to colleagues with expertise, and training on end-of-life care needs of patients with dementia and their caregivers.