Search

Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID) was decriminalized in Canada in 2016 for individuals 18 years or older who met eligibility criteria. Currently, individuals younger than 18 years are legally permitted to access an assisted death in the Netherlands and Belgium, but not in Canada. To-date, no work has compared factors shaping the policy processes and outcomes in these three countries. Therefore, our objective was to explore the legalities of assisted dying for minors in the Netherlands and Belgium, along with how each jurisdiction arrived at their respective policies and why the trajectory differed in Canada. After screening and compiling peer-reviewed and grey literature, we used Yanow's interpretive method for comparative work to review included materials. We framed findings using Hajer's discourse coalition theory. The Dutch and Belgian contexts relied upon a parliamentary approach in legalizing assisted dying for mature minors that emphasized suffering, whereas Canada's approach was initiated by a Supreme Court of Canada decision and emphasized human rights. While the Netherlands and Belgium viewed mature minors as capable to make decisions about assisted dying, the Canadian position on mature minors' decisional capacity with respect to assisted dying remains unsettled. This work contributes to understanding how context and sociopolitical values shape assisted dying legislations and treatment of mature minors, while highlighting areas requiring further study amid ongoing debate in Canada., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest Statement The authors have no conflict of interests to declare., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

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., Competing Interests: Competing interests statement:The authors declare no competing interest.

Background: In nearly all jurisdictions where it is permitted, Medical Assistance in Dying is situated in a healthcare system. Currently, limited evidence demonstrates how supply and demand factors influence access to Medical Assistance in Dying., Objective: The aim of this study is to synthesise empirical research from jurisdictions where Medical Assistance in Dying is legal to identify how supply and demand factors influence access for eligible adults., Method: An integrative review was conducted. CINAHL Complete, PubMed, ProQuest, PsycINFO and Embase databases were systematically searched for studies published between January 1998 and January 2024. Records were independently assessed against inclusion and exclusion criteria. Additional studies were identified by forward and backward citation searching. All studies were assessed for quality. Findings were analysed deductively using an established conceptual framework, and a secondary narrative synthesis was undertaken., Results: Fifty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria. Most studies (n = 32) reported results related to the supply side, 16 reported on the demand side and 10 reported on both supply and demand dimensions of access. Studies about supply showed that health service policies may obstruct access to Medical Assistance in Dying. For healthcare professionals, the practice entails an additional workload and can create tensions with colleagues. Studies of the demand for Medical Assistance in Dying focused on supporting time-critical decisions, adequate planning and caregiver support., Conclusion: Access to Medical Assistance in Dying requires the participation of health services and healthcare professionals but is hindered by policies that obstruct access and direct financial and indirect emotional labour costs. Innovative and inclusive models to promote high-quality, compassionate care at the end of life and access to Medical Assistance in Dying should be considered., Patient or Public Contribution: Patients, caregivers and service users were involved in many of the studies included in this review, and their experiences and perspectives contributed to the analysis and synthesis in this review., (© 2024 The Author(s). Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Assisted dying, also commonly known as euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide, is legal in many countries. Interest in assisted dying is growing due to evolving societal understandings of a good death and a desire for choice. Ethico-legal perspectives are well-known, but as societies become more heterogenous, a greater understanding of the perspectives of people from diverse racial, ethnic, and cultural backgrounds is needed., Aim: To explore perspectives of people from diverse racial, ethnic and cultural backgrounds about assisted dying., Design: Scoping review with narrative synthesis. The protocol was registered with Open Science Framework., Data Sources: Medline, CINAHL Complete, PsycINFO and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global were searched from inception to May 2023. Citations were independently assessed against inclusion and exclusion criteria., Results: Of the 17 included studies, perspectives of assisted dying were presented according to religion, religiosity, spirituality, race, ethnicity and ancestry. Perspectives were diverse, presenting more as a spectrum, with multiple intersections and interconnections. Support and/or opposition for assisted dying differed according to cultural attributes, but even amongst those with similar cultural attributes, perspectives differed according to life experiences and notions of suffering., Conclusion: Perspectives on assisted dying are dynamic and evolving. Even where assisted dying is legalised, individual's cultural attributes contribute to unique perspectives of assisted dying as an end-of-life option. Thus, understanding a person's culture, beliefs, expectations and choices in illness, treatment goals and care is fundamental, extending beyond what may be already considered as part of clinician-patient care relationships and routine advance care planning., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

According to the expressivist objection, laws that only allow assisted dying for those suffering from certain medical conditions express the judgement that their lives are not worth living. I have recently argued that an autonomy-based approach that legally allows assisted suicide for all who make an autonomous request is a way to avoid the expressivist objection. In response to this, Thomas Donaldson has argued that rather than avoiding the expressivist objection, an autonomy-based approach extends this objection. According to Donaldson, this is because helping a person achieve a goal requires endorsement of that goal. In this reply, I show that Donaldson misunderstands the target of the expressivist objection: it is not aimed at an individual's attitude towards another person's death but rather at a legal regulation. Moreover, helping someone end their life does not necessarily require endorsing this goal-instead, respect for a person's autonomous choice can be another reason for providing assisted suicide. Donaldson also assumes that the autonomy-based approach requires doctors to accept autonomous requests for assisted dying. Yet, this approach merely makes it legal for individuals (not necessarily only doctors) to provide assisted suicide to autonomous persons but does not require anyone to do so., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Dignity is omnipresent in Western ethics, but it also provokes dissension and controversy. One of the most striking examples is the debate on medically assisted death, where dignity is invoked to support antagonistic positions. While some authors conclude that the concept is useless as an ethical reference, many others invite us to deepen our analysis from a multidimensional perspective, to enrich it and make it useful. This scoping study is intended to provide an overview of the different conceptions of dignity used in the assisted dying debate, to better grasp the multiple facets of the concept., Methods: The Joanna Briggs Institute's JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis guided the scoping review. Key words were based on the researchers' expertise and were used to identify relevant literature in French and English. Eleven databases covering the last six decades were consulted. Initially, 2,071 references were found in the databases. After excluding duplicates, screening titles, abstracts, and full texts, and after a specific literature search on the concept of relational dignity, 156 papers were found to match the identified inclusion criteria., Results: The literature highlights the stark confrontation between two dominant conceptions of dignity: ontological and autonomist. However, a lesser-known conceptualization of dignity integrates these two perspectives, underlining the relational and social dimensions of dignity. As a result, dignity emerges as a dynamic, experiential, and dialogical concept, that modulates itself according to circumstances. This raises the possibility of breaking through the binary debate and questioning the current frameworks that define dignity., Conclusions: This multidimensional conceptualization of dignity could lead to a more complete and nuanced understanding of the concept, as well as open richer normative horizons regarding the issue of medically assisted death., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

The entry into force of the Organic Law on the Regulation of Euthanasia in June 2021 obliges clinicians to reconsider their professional work, in the face of a new service that expands the limits of what was considered correct until then. This new service affects the entire healthcare system, but especially primary care professionals. Beyond the procedural and moral aspects, it is necessary to rethink the assessment of the patient who expresses a wish to die. In this review, we start with the relatively recent definition of the wish to hasten death (WTHD), its causes, epidemiology and differential diagnosis. Then, we examine the different mental frameworks found in the process of dying and the concept of a «good death». Finally, we analyse the paths that can lead to the provision of aid in dying within the framework of current legislation. The WTHD is specific to requests in case of «serious and advanced illness», not in other cases contemplated by the Law. When faced with a request to activate the Aid in Dying Prestation in the context of WTHD (that is, in the proximity of death), it becomes necessary to increase the patient's sense of control and begin to work on grief. Besides, in the face of an administrative process that will necessarily be long, adapting the therapeutic efforts and sedation should be considered as possible options. We understand that it is essential not to create false expectations for patients/families and not to overload healthcare professionals with administrative tasks that will be futile. It is difficult to balance these in the face of a request for a right to which the patient should always have access., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Publicado por Elsevier España S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Background & objectives: Identifying the impacts of COVID-19 on patients' and practitioners' access to legal assisted dying and euthanasia (AD&E) services is vital to informing service continuity in an ongoing pandemic. Methods: An anonymous online survey collected qualitative and quantitative data from health practitioners and agencies providing legal AD&E services ( n = 89), complemented by semi-structured interviews with 18 survey respondents who volunteered. Results: Following governments' responses to the dynamic pandemic context, rates of AD&E inquiries and requests fluctuated across and within jurisdictions, based on a complex interaction of factors affecting patient access to AD&E agencies and assessors as services were disrupted. Service flexibility and nimbleness became key elements in continuing service availability and included calculated 'rule-breaking' considered justifiable to adhere to established bioethics. Making innovative adjustments to usual practice led to reviewing the effectiveness of AD&E services and laws, resulting in providers now improving services and lobbying for legislative change., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Context: Palliative Care (PC) and Medically Assisted Death (MAD), specifically assisted suicide and euthanasia, are distinct practices characterized by differing objectives, methods, implementation and outcomes. Representatives of PC, including scientific societies or physicians, may, in certain cases, adopt a critical stance towards MAD., Objectives: The study aims to explore the underlying reasons for such opposition., Methods: To this end, the philosophical underpinnings and legal conditions of PC and MAD will be analyzed., Results: The ethical and philosophical landscape of PC and MAD leads us to identify, on one hand, the Hippocratic paradigm and, on the other hand, what we call Socratic medicine. From a legal analysis perspective, the presence of intolerable suffering serves as a common ground between the two practices, albeit risking being the subject of misunderstandings and instrumental objections., Conclusion: Preventing an instrumental use of PC in relation to MAD is crucial to enable the respect and the coexistence of the two practices., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

As more and more American states legalize medical aid in dying (MAID), Consultation-Liaison Psychiatrists will increasingly be asked to assist medical and surgical colleagues in differentiating this end-of-life practice from suicide. Where suicide is traditionally understood as an act clouded by depression, desperation, or both, MAID represents a terminally medically ill patient's effort to take control of their dying process when death is imminent, likely to occur within 6 months, and inevitable. Rendering opinions on patient suicidality in the setting of a complex co-occurring medical illness is a Consultation-Liaison Psychiatrist's bread and butter. This paper seeks to elucidate 4 points that distinguish MAID from suicide: (1) Hastening death when the end of natural life is approaching is not synonymous with suicide in the vernacular American usage of the term. (2) Unlike suicide, MAID is a highly collaborative process in which dying, mentally capable adults involve their doctors and loved ones in legally recognized decisions to hasten death. (3) The clinical presentation of patients requesting MAID differs from that of individuals whose suicidality is driven by psychopathology. (4) Certain behavioral traits differentiate such MAID patients from suicidal ones. Understanding and applying these distinctions in the consultation-liaison arena will help remove the stigma of suicide from end-of-life care deliberations where it does not belong while ensuring appropriate end-of-life care for dying individuals for whom MAID is the culmination of a carefully considered process of self-determination rather than suicide., (Copyright © 2024 Academy of Consultation-Liaison Psychiatry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In 2021, Spain became the first Southern European country to grant and provide the right to euthanasia and medically assisted suicide. According to the law, the State has the obligation to ensure its access through the health services, which means that healthcare professionals' participation is crucial. Nevertheless, its implementation has been uneven. Our research focuses on understanding possible ethical conflicts that shape different positions towards the practice of Medical Assistance in Dying, on identifying which core ideas may be underlying them, and on suggesting possible reasons for this disparity. The knowledge acquired contributes to understanding its complexity, shedding light into ambivalent profiles and creating strategies to increase their participation., Methods: We conducted an exploratory qualitative research study by means of semi-structured interviews (1 h) with 25 physicians and nurses from primary care (12), hospital care (7), and palliative care (6), 17 women and 8 men, recruited from Madrid, Catalonia, and Andalusia between March and May 2023. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and coded in Atlas.ti software by means of thematic and interpretative methods to develop a conceptual model., Results: We identified four approaches to MAiD: Full Support (FS), Conditioned Support (CS), Conditioned Rejection (CR), and Full Rejection (FR). Full Support and Full Rejection fitted the traditional for and against positions on MAiD. Nevertheless, there was a gray area in between represented by conditioned profiles, whose participation cannot be predicted beforehand. The profiles were differentiated considering their different interpretations of four core ideas: end-of-life care, religion, professional duty/deontology, and patient autonomy. These ideas can intersect, which means that participants' positions are multicausal and complex. Divergences between profiles can be explained by different sources of moral authority used in their moral reasoning and their individualistic or relational approach to autonomy., Conclusions: There is ultimately no agreement but rather a coexistence of plural moral perspectives regarding MAiD among healthcare professionals. Comprehending which cases are especially difficult to evaluate or which aspects of the law are not easy to interpret will help in developing new strategies, clarifying the legal framework, or guiding moral reasoning and education with the aim of reducing unpredictable non-participations in MAID., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Slippery slope argumentation features prominently in debates over assisted suicide. The jurisdiction of Oregon features prominently too, especially as regards parliamentary scrutiny of assisted suicide proposals. This paper examines Oregon's public data (including certain official pronouncements) on assisted suicide in light of the two basic versions of the slippery slope argument, the empirical and moral-logical versions. Oregon's data evidences some normatively interesting shifts in its assisted suicide practice which in turn prompts consideration of two elements of moral-logical slippage that are not widely discussed. One is slippage from an initial autonomy-based public justification for assisted suicide which does not include burden-based concerns within its operative account of voluntariness to an evolved public justification that does. The other is an expansion of a terminal illness ground to include chronic illnesses effectively rendered terminal via a refusal of treatment.

'Assisted dying' (an umbrella term for euthanasia and/or assisted suicide) is frequently defended as an act of autonomous self-determination in death but, given a choice, between 93.3% and 100% of patients are reluctant to self-administer (median 99.5%). If required to self-administer, fewer patients request assisted death and, of these, a sizable proportion do not self-administer but die of natural causes. This manifest avoidance runs counter to the concept of autonomous self-determination, even on the supposition that suicide could truly be autonomous. The avoidance of self-administration does not show that self-administration, when it occurs, is necessarily autonomous. It suggests, rather, that there are other frames by which assisted dying is being understood. One such is desire for medical control, a desire shared by patients and doctors. Such a frame is not directed towards an exacting autonomy (self-directed action by the patient) but towards a comforting heteronomy (letting the doctor take control).

It is essential for high-quality health care for providers to adhere to the principle of truth telling, speaking with clarity and honesty. The euphemism medical aid in dying, MAID, is being mainstreamed in the medical literature by proponents of physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia. This trend is deleterious because MAID's proponents do not consistently express the meaning and intent of the practice, and the phrase downplays the fact that a provider is participating in the act of death for a patient. The euphemism blurs the differences between providing high-quality palliative care and participating in the death of a patient prior to a natural death. Some believe the term MAID is used exclusively for assisted suicide in patients with a terminal diagnosis with less than 6 months to live, when in fact it is being used for both assisted suicide and euthanasia and for patients who have no terminal diagnosis with potentially years to live. We are calling up on our colleagues to cease the use of this and other euphemisms in this ethically controversial practice. We recommend standardized language that accurately denotes the context and process. Provider Assisted Death by Prescription (PAD-P) and Provider Assisted Death by Administration (PAD-A) are terms that most accurately describe the process, taking into account who is prescribing or administering a lethal substance and the outcome of the actions. Literature that addresses this practice should be described as ending life literature. The standardized language needs to be used on death certificates so we can most accurately assess the impact that provider-assisted death is having on society. Emphasizing truth telling in morally controversial practices will foster trust among health care providers and with patients., Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 AMDA – The Society for Post-Acute and Long-Term Care Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

This paper aims to refute a common line of argument that it is immoral for physicians to engage in medical assistance in death (MAiD), i.e., the practices of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. The argument in question is based on the notion that participating in MAiD is contrary to the professional-role obligations of physicians, due to MAiD's putative inconsistency with the ends of medicine. The paper describes several major flaws from which that argument suffers., (© 2023. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry Pty Ltd.)

Even in the Netherlands, where the practice of physician-assisted death (PAD) has been legalized for over 20 years, there is no such thing as a 'right to die'. Especially patients with extraordinary requests, such as a wish for PAD based on psychiatric suffering, advanced dementia, or (a limited number of) multiple geriatric syndromes, encounter barriers in access to PAD. In this paper, we discuss whether these barriers can be justified in the context of the Dutch situation where PAD is legally permitted for those who suffer unbearably and hopelessly as a result of medical conditions. Furthermore, we explore whether there are options to address some of the barriers or their consequences, both within the Dutch legal framework or by adjusting the legal framework, and whether these options are feasible. We conclude that although there are insufficient arguments to overrule the doctor's freedom of conscience in the Netherlands, there are ways to address some of the barriers, mainly by offering support to doctors that would be willing to support a request. Moreover, we believe it is morally required to reduce or mitigate where possible the negative consequences of the barriers for patients, such as the long waiting time for those who suffer from psychiatric disorders, because it is unlikely the adjustments suggested to the system will ensure reasonable access for these patient groups., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

The literature on the ethics of conscientious objection focuses on objections to participating in morally contested practices. This literature emphasizes the potential for participation to undermine objecting clinicians' moral integrity. Significantly less attention has been given to conscientious objection to teaching morally contested practices. Thus, it is unclear whether teaching morally contested practices has the potential to undermine objecting educators' moral integrity, and to the extent that it does, what steps can be taken to address this concern. We accordingly examine the ethics of conscientious objection to teaching morally contested practices, with a focus on teaching physician-assisted death (PAD) to trainees in US palliative care programs. We focus on three primary components of teaching PAD: (1) teaching the history and context of PAD; (2) teaching trainees how to understand and respond to requests for PAD; and (3) teaching trainees how to provide PAD. We argue that teaching components one and two has little potential to undermine objecting educators' moral integrity. Moreover, permitting objecting educators to opt out of teaching components one and two might undermine the education of trainees. In contrast, allowing objecting educators to opt out of teaching how to provide PAD may be important to preserving their moral integrity, and is unlikely to undermine trainees' education. We argue that educators should be permitted to opt out of teaching trainees how to provide PAD and describe policies that training programs can adopt to implement this approach., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

The patient's autonomy and well-being are sometimes seen as central to the ethical justification of voluntary euthanasia (VE) and physician-assisted suicide (PAS). While respecting the patient's wish to die plausibly promotes the patient's autonomy, it is less obvious how alleviating the patient's suffering through death benefits the patient. Death eliminates the subject, so how can we intelligibly maintain that the patient's well-being is promoted when she/he no longer exists? This article interrogates two typical answers given by philosophers: (a) that death confers a well-being benefit in the sense that it actualises a comparatively better life course for the patient (ie, a shorter life with less net suffering), and (b) that death is beneficial because non-existence which entails no suffering is superior to an existence filled with suffering. A close examination of the two senses in which the patient might incur a well-being benefit reveals problems that preclude physicians delivering VE/PAS in the name of beneficence., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

In this essay, we consider questions arising from cases in which people request medical assistance in dying (MAiD) in unjust social circumstances. We develop our argument by asking two questions. First, can decisions made in the context of unjust social circumstance be meaningfully autonomous? We understand 'unjust social circumstances' to be circumstances in which people do not have meaningful access to the range of options to which they are entitled and 'autonomy' as self-governance in the service of personally meaningful goals, values and commitments. People in these circumstances would choose otherwise, were conditions more just. We consider and reject arguments that the autonomy of people choosing death in the context of injustice is necessarily reduced, either by restricting their options for self-determination, through their internalisation of oppressive attitudes or by undermining their hope to the point that they despair.Second, should MAiD be available to people in such circumstances, even when a sound argument can be made that the agents in question are autonomous? In response, we use a harm reduction approach, arguing that even though such decisions are tragic, MAiD should be available. Our argument engages with relational theories of autonomy as well as recent criticism raised against them and is intended to be general in application, although it emerges in response to the Canadian legal regimen around MAiD, with a focus on recent changes in Canada's eligibility criteria to qualify for MAiD., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

In the paper, titled 'Choosing death in unjust conditions: hope, autonomy and harm reduction,' Wiebe and Mullin argue that people living in unjust social conditions are sufficiently autonomous to request medical assistance in dying (MAiD). The ethical issue is that some people may request MAiD primarily because of unjust social conditions, not their illness, disease, disability or decline in capability. It is easily agreed that people living in unjust social conditions can be autonomous. Nevertheless, Wiebe and Mullin fail to appreciate that autonomy is only a necessary condition for MAiD. In addition to autonomy, one must decide that providing assisted dying to a patient because they are living in unjust social conditions is ethical. Central to making this ethical decision is the principle of non-maleficence, famously articulated as 'do no harm.' The authors admit that performing MAiD in response to unjust social circumstances is harmful, but they justify this harmful action by appealing to the principle of harm reduction. A fundamental flaw of their approach is that it relies on the legislative definition of intolerable suffering, which is based on circular reasoning and given that 99.2% of patients that have applied for MAiD satisfied this criterion, it is essentially equivalent to no standard/criterion. Canadian society is struggling with the ethical implications of its permissive MAiD programme, and, fundamental to this debate, will be determining the proper balance between autonomy and non-maleficence for people living in unjust social conditions., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

No abstract available.

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., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Ramos et al. paper offers a narrative review of Spanish Organic Law 3/2021, which regulates euthanasia, focusing on its application to individuals with mental disorders. Ramos et al. examine the application of legal prerequisites from an ethical-legal perspective to ascertain the conditions under which psychiatric euthanasia might be considered legitimate and compliant with legal stipulations. Nevertheless, it is apparent that the core ethical inquiries linked to this matter have not been exhaustively investigated. The criteria laid out are, in our assessment, still open to further debate and broader deliberation. Our article emphasizes the need for a comprehensive ethical and legal debate in Spain regarding psychiatric euthanasia. Competency assessment is central to the legislation, but there are concerns about the validity of assessment tools and the subjective nature of interviews. Furthermore, defining irreversible suffering in mental health contexts poses challenges. The article advocates for a deeper understanding of the needs of individuals with mental disorders before considering euthanasia and emphasizes the importance of comprehensive care and psychosocial interventions in reducing the desire for euthanasia. Ultimately, it underscores the ethical complexities of euthanasia in mental health and the necessity of prioritizing comprehensive care in addressing these complexities., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Consensual homicide remains a crime in jurisdictions where active voluntary euthanasia has been legalized. At the same time, both jurisdictions, in which euthanasia is legal and those in which it is not, recognize that all patients (whether severely ill or not) have the right to refuse or withdraw medical treatment (including life-saving treatment). In this paper, I focus on the tensions between these three norms (the permission of active euthanasia, the permission to reject life-saving treatment, and the prohibition of consensual homicide), assuming a justification of euthanasia based on the right to (personal) autonomy. I argue that the best way to provide a coherent account of these norms is to claim that patients have two distinct rights: the right to autonomy and the right to bodily integrity. This solution has some relevant implications for the discussion of the legalization of active euthanasia., (© 2023 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: In the context of nationwide law reform, New South Wales (NSW) became the last state in Australia to legalise voluntary assisted dying (VAD) - commencing 28 November 2023. Clinicians have divergent views regarding VAD, with varying levels of understanding, support, and willingness to be involved, and these may have a significant impact on the successful implementation., Aims: To understand levels of support, understanding and willingness to be involved in VAD among clinical staff across NSW during implementation of VAD., Methods: A multisite, cross-sectional online survey of clinicians across four local health districts, assessing relevant demographics, awareness of and support for VAD legislation and willingness to be involved in different levels of VAD-related clinical activities., Results: A total of 3010 clinical staff completed the survey. A majority of participants were aware of VAD legislation in NSW (86.35%) and supportive of it (76%), with nursing and allied health clinicians significantly more likely than medical specialists to express support. Among medical specialists, support was statistically more likely in those who did not care for patients at the end of life and those with limited knowledge of the legislation. Willingness of medical specialists to perform key roles was significantly lower, with 41.49% willing to act in coordinating or consulting roles, and only 23.21% as administering practitioners., Conclusions: The majority of clinical staff surveyed across NSW supported VAD legislation. While many eligible clinicians were reluctant to be actively involved, sufficient numbers appear willing to provide VAD services, indicating that successful implementation should be possible., (© 2023 The Authors. Internal Medicine Journal published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Royal Australasian College of Physicians.)

The controversy over the equivalence of continuous sedation until death (CSD) and physician-assisted suicide/euthanasia (PAS/E) provides an opportunity to focus on a significant extended use of CSD. This extension, suggested by the equivalence of PAS/E and CSD, is designed to promote additional patient autonomy at the end-of-life. Samuel LiPuma, in his article, "Continuous Sedation Until Death as Physician-Assisted Suicide/Euthanasia: A Conceptual Analysis" claims equivalence between CSD and death; his paper is seminal in the equivalency debate. Critics contend that sedation follows proportionality protocols for which LiPuma's thesis does not adequately account. Furthermore, sedation may not eliminate consciousness, and as such LiPuma's contention that CSD is equivalent to neocortical death is suspect. We not only defend the equivalence thesis, but also expand it to include additional moral considerations. First, we explain the equivalence thesis. This is followed by a defense of the thesis against five criticisms. The third section critiques the current use of CSD. Finally, we offer two proposals that, if adopted, would broaden the use of PAS/E and CSD and thereby expand options at the end-of-life., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press, on behalf of the Journal of Medicine and Philosophy Inc. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objectives: We explored characteristics of people with an accumulation of health problems related to old age requesting euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide (EAS) and identified characteristics associated with granting EAS requests. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional questionnaire study among Dutch physicians on characteristics of these people requesting EAS ( n = 123). Associations between characteristics and granting a request were assessed using logistic regression analyses. Results: People requesting EAS were predominantly >80 years old (82.4%), female (70.0%), widow/widower (71.7%), (partially) care-dependent (76.7%), and had a life expectancy >12 months (68.6%). The most prevalent health problems were osteoarthritis (70.4%) and impaired vision and hearing (53.0% and 40.9%). The most cited reasons to request EAS were physical deterioration (68.6%) and dependence (61.2%). 44.7% of requests were granted. Granting a request was positively associated with care dependence, disability/immobility, impaired vision, osteoporosis, loss of control, suffering without prospect of improvement and a treatment relationship with the physician >12 months. Conclusion: Enhanced understanding of people with an accumulation of health problems related to old age requesting EAS can contribute to the ongoing debate on the permissibility of EAS in people without life-threatening conditions., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they do not have any conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Kraak-Steenken, Renckens, Pasman, Bosma, van der Heide and Onwuteaka-Philipsen.)

Background: Euthanasia and assisted suicide (EAS) requests are common in countries where they are legal. Loneliness and social isolation are modifiable risk factors for mental illness and suicidal behaviour and are common in terminal illness. Our objective was to summarise available literature to clarify whether these and related measures of social connectedness might contribute to requests for EAS., Methods: We conducted a pre-registered (PROSPERO CRD42019160508) systematic review and narrative synthesis of quantitative literature investigating associations between social connectedness and a) requested/actual EAS, b) attitudes towards EAS, and c) a desire for hastened death (DHD) by searching six databases (PsycINFO, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar) from inception to November 2022, rating eligible peer-reviewed, empirical studies using the QATSO quality assessment tool., Results: We identified 37 eligible studies that investigated associations with a) requested/actual EAS (n = 9), b) attitudes to EAS (n = 16), and c) DHD (n = 14), with limited overlap, including 17,359 participants. The majority (62%) were rated at medium/high risk of bias. Focussing our narrative synthesis on the more methodologically sound studies, we found no evidence to support an association between different constructs of social connectedness and requested or actual EAS, and very little evidence to support an association with attitudes to EAS or an association with DHD., Conclusions: Our findings for all age groups are consistent with a those of a previous systematic review focussed on older adults and suggest that poor social connectedness is not a clear risk factor for EAS or for measures more distally related to EAS. However, we acknowledge low study quality in some studies in relation to sampling, unvalidated exposure/outcome measures, cross-sectional design, unadjusted analyses, and multiple testing. Clinical assessment should focus on modifying established risk factors for suicide and EAS, such as hopelessness and depression, as well as improving any distressing aspects of social disconnectedness to improve quality of life., Funding: UKRI, NIHR., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Relatives have no formal position in the practice of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide (EAS) according to Dutch legislation. However, research shows that physicians often involve relatives in EAS decision-making. It remains unclear why physicians do (not) want to involve relatives. Therefore, we examined how many physicians in the Netherlands involve relatives in EAS decision-making and explored reasons for (not) involving relatives and what involvement entails., Methods: In a mixed-methods study, 746 physicians (33% response rate) completed a questionnaire, and 20 were interviewed. The questionnaire included two statements on relatives' involvement in EAS decision-making. Descriptive statistics were used, and multivariable logistic regression analyses to explore characteristics associated with involving relatives. In subsequent interviews, we explored physicians' views on involving relatives in EAS decision-making. Interviews were thematically analysed., Results: The majority of physicians want to know relatives' opinions about an EAS request (80%); a smaller group also takes these opinions into account in EAS decision-making (35%). Physicians who had ever received an explicit EAS request were more likely to want to know opinions and clinical specialists and elderly care physicians were more likely to take these opinions into account. In interviews, physicians mentioned several reasons for involving relatives: e.g. to give relatives space and help them in their acceptance, to tailor support, to be able to perform EAS in harmony, and to mediate in case of conflicting views. Furthermore, physicians explained that relatives' opinions can influence the decision-making process but cannot be a decisive factor. If relatives oppose the EAS request, physicians find the process more difficult and try to mediate between patients and relatives by investigating relatives' objections and providing appropriate information. Reasons for not taking relatives' opinions into account include not wanting to undermine patient autonomy and protecting relatives from a potential burdensome decision., Conclusions: Although physicians know that relatives have no formal role, involving relatives in EAS decision-making is common practice in the Netherlands. Physicians consider this important as relatives need to continue with their lives and may need bereavement support. Additionally, physicians want to perform EAS in harmony with everyone involved. However, relatives' opinions are not decisive., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

There is a pressing debate in the United States concerning the implied physicians' obligation to do no harm and the status of legalizing physician-assisted suicide (PAS). Key issues that underpin the debate are important to consider. These include: (1) foundational medical beginnings; (2) euthanasia's historical and legal background context; and (3) the key arguments held by those for and against legalization of PAS. This paper reviews the major claims made by proponents for the legalization of PAS and the associated complexities and concerns that help underscore the importance of conscience freedoms. Relief of suffering, respect for patient autonomy, and public policy arguments are discussed in these contexts. We argue here that the emphasis by healthcare providers should be on high quality and compassionate care for those at the end of life's journey who are questioning whether to prematurely end their lives. If medicine loses its chief focus on the quality of caring-even when a cure is not possible-it betrays its objective and purpose. In this backdrop, legalization of PAS harms not only healthcare professionals, but also the medical profession's mission itself. Medicine's foundation is grounded in the concept of never intentionally to inflict harm. Inflicting death by any means is not professional or proper, and is not trustworthy medicine., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

A small proportion of older people in the Netherlands want to end their lives because they feel their lives to be 'completed' and no longer worth living. Currently, there is heated debate over whether or not these people should have the right to euthanasia. Drawing on previous research, we conduct a heuristic analysis of views and experiences of three different 'parties' involved in this debate, namely, the older people, their relatives and friends and medical professionals. The views of these three groups tend to be divergent and conflicting, posing a difficult dilemma to decision-makers., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Objective: To identify the neurological diseases for which euthanasia and assisted suicide are most frequently requested in the countries where these medical procedures are legal and the specific characteristics of euthanasia in some of these diseases, and to show the evolution of euthanasia figures., Methods: We conducted a systematic literature review., Results: Dementia, motor neuron disease, multiple sclerosis, and Parkinson's disease are the neurological diseases that most frequently motivate requests for euthanasia or assisted suicide. Requests related to dementia constitute the largest group, are growing, and raise additional ethical and legal issues due to these patients' diminished decision-making capacity. In some countries, the ratios of euthanasia requests to all cases of multiple sclerosis, motor neuron disease, or Huntington disease are higher than for any other disease., Conclusions: After cancer, neurological diseases are the most frequent reason for requesting euthanasia or assisted suicide., (Copyright © 2024 Sociedad Española de Neurología. Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Although in Italy there is currently no effective law on physician-assisted suicide or euthanasia, Decision No. 242 issued by the Italian Constitutional Court on September 25, 2019 established that an individual who, under specific circumstances, has facilitated the implementation of an independent and freely-formed resolve to commit suicide by another individual is exempt from criminal liability. Following this ruling, some citizens have submitted requests for assisted suicide to the public health system, generating a situation of great uncertainty in the application processes. As a matter of fact, shared and defined procedures are lacking as Decision 242/2019 merely added some principles on which the legislature will have to base its future intervention. This paper analyses the advisory role that the Decision attributes to territorial ethics committees with the aim of stimulating discussions on their role in oversight mechanisms. The proposed conclusion is that the envisaged role does not appear consistent with the functions of these bodies and is ultimately substantially undefined and unjustified., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Canada's decriminalisation of assisted death has elicited significant ethical implications for the use of assisted death in healthcare contexts. Euthanasia by removal of vital organs (ERVO) is a theoretical extension of medically assisted death with an increased plausibility of implementation in light of the rapid expansion of assisted death eligibility laws and criteria in Canada. ERVO entails removing organs from a living patient under general anaesthesia as the mechanism of death. While ERVO is intended to maximise the viability of organs procured from the euthanised patient for donation to recipients, ending the lives of patient donors in this manner solely to benefit ill or dying recipient patients merits further ethical consideration. Specifically, the paper explores the application of personalist bioethics in determining whether the means of procuring organs through assisted death justifies the end of improving the lives of those who would benefit from receiving them. Further, by discussing the medical, social and ethical implications of ERVO, I will explicate a broader philosophical understanding of the influences of legalising assisted death on human dignity and conscience., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: The situation in France is unique, having a legal framework for continuous and deep sedation (CDS). However, its use in intensive care units (ICU), combined with the withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies, still raises ethical issues, particularly its potential to hasten death. The legalization of assistance in dying, i.e., assisted suicide or euthanasia at the patient's request, is currently under discussion in France. The objectives of this national survey were first, to assess whether ICU professionals perceive CDS administered to ICU patients as a practice that hastens death, in addition to relieving unbearable suffering, and second, to assess ICU professionals' perceptions of assistance in dying., Methods: A national survey with online questionnaires for ICU physicians and nursesaddressed through the French Society of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine., Results: A total of 956 ICU professionals responded to the survey (38% physicians and 62% nurses). Of these, 22% of physicians and 12% of nurses (p < 0.001) felt that the purpose of CDS was to hasten death. For 20% of physicians, CDS combined with terminal extubation was considered an assistance in dying. For 52% of ICU professionals, the current framework did not sufficiently cover the range of situations that occur in the ICU. A favorable opinion on the potential legalization of assistance in dying was observed in 83% of nurses and 71% of physicians (p < 0.001), with no preference between assisted suicide and euthanasia., Conclusion: Our findings highlight the tension between CDS and assisted suicide/euthanasia in the specific context of intensive care and suggest that ICU professionals would be supportive of a legislative evolution., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.)

Background: On 26 February 2020, the German Federal Constitutional Court revoked a law (§ 217 StGB) that had banned assisted suicide intended to be repeated on a regularly basis. Since then, a possible new legal regulation has been discussed. This study examined the knowledge, experiences, and attitudes of younger physicians towards physician-assisted suicide (PAS)., Methods: A quantitative survey of postgraduate courses in emergency medicine, critical care medicine, and hematology was conducted from November 2022 to March 2023. Possible factors influencing attitudes towards PAS were analyzed., Results: A total of 1163 records (response rate 82.1%) were analyzed. Of the participants, 90.8% had experience with dying patients, 62.3% supported PAS only in palliative scenarios, 20.1% supported PAS regardless of the health status, 33.1% have been asked for PAS, and 3.3% had participated in PAS. In addition, 71.0% did not know the content of the Federal Constitutional Court's decision on § 217, 72.0% were not informed about the legislative proposals for the new regulation of PAS, and 66.4% saw doctors as the right person to decide whether a suicidal wish is permissible., Conclusion: Younger doctors differentiate in their attitude towards PAS between people without illnesses and those in palliative treatment situations. Further investigations into the causes of the frequent ignorance of the normative foundations are necessary. The results suggest that more educational work needs to be done about suicide alternatives and palliative care options., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Objectives : To explore attitudes towards assisted dying in dementia (ADID) and the rationales underlying these attitudes, among younger and older adults. Method : We conducted separate focus groups with younger ( n = 11) and older adults ( n = 14) in the United Kingdom with personal or professional experience of dementia. Discussions were prompted by two vignettes depicting scenarios of ADID. The data were transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis. Results : Though sometimes stronger in the older adults, many of the attitudes and underlying rationales were common across the age groups. Analysis generated four themes: 'Perceptions of the disease', 'A case for empowerment', 'The morality of killing' and 'Logistical complexities'. Conclusions : For some, ADID was a hopeful alternative to the challenges they had witnessed in dementia. For others, the logistical problems surrounding ADID were insurmountable. Discussions were informed and insightful, highlighting the importance of including the general public in this ongoing debate., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Many people on both sides of the debate to legalise physician-hastened death are motivated by compassion and a desire to provide better end of life care for others. Assisted dying may include euthanasia and/or assisted suicide (EAS). It is legal in some jurisdictions and under debate in others including Ireland. EAS is a complex, sensitive and can be an emotive issue; detailed and nuanced examination of the subject is needed. To enhance this discussion, we examine EAS through the lens of quality. In examining EAS from this stance, we consider the action, along with the outcomes, the impact of the outcomes from other jurisdictions with legalised EAS, alongside the risks and the balancing measures used, in addition to considering the intervention itself. Progressive expansion of eligibility for EAS has occurred over time in the Netherlands, Belgium and Canada. Given the complexity of assessing coercion, the risks to persons in vulnerable groups (including older persons, persons with mental health conditions and persons with disabilities), the progressive expansion of eligibility for EAS, the lack of safety and the undermining of suicide prevention strategies, the current law is most protective of persons in vulnerable groups in the interest of social justice. Person-centred and compassionate care needs be prioritised with greater access and equitable access to primary and specialist palliative care and mental health care for persons with incurable and terminal illnesses and support for caregivers allowing patients to die naturally with optimised symptom control., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared.

Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared.

Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared.

Objectives: The French government voted a new law in February 2016 called the Claeys-Leonetti Law, which established the right to deep and continuous sedation, confirmed the ban on euthanasia and ruled out physician-assisted suicide. The aim of this work was to gather the opinion of patients on continuous sedation and the legalisation of medical assistance in dying and to explore determinants associated with favourable and unfavourable opinions., Methods: This was a French national prospective multicentre study between 2016 and 2020., Results: 331 patients with incurable cancer suffering from locally advanced or metastatic cancer in 14 palliative care units were interviewed. 48.6% of participants expressed a favourable opinion about physician-assisted suicide and 27.2% an unfavourable opinion about its legalisation. Regarding euthanasia, 52% of patients were in favour of its legalisation. In univariate analysis, the only factor determining opinion was belief in God., Conclusions: While most healthy French people are in favour of legalising euthanasia, only half of palliative care patients expressed this opinion. Medical palliative care specialists were largely opposed to euthanasia. The only determining factor identified was a cultural factor that was independent of the other studied variables. This common factor was found in other studies conducted on cohorts from other countries. This study contributes to the knowledge and thinking about the impact of patients' personal beliefs and values regarding their opinions about euthanasia and assisted suicide., Trial Registration Number: NCT03664856., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)