Search

Background: There is only limited knowledge about the emotional impact that performing euthanasia has on primary care physicians (PCPs) in the Netherlands., Objective: To obtain more insight into the emotional impact on PCPs of performing euthanasia or assisted suicide, and to tailor the educational needs of vocational PCP trainees accordingly., Methods: Qualitative research, consisting of four focus group studies. The setting was primary care in the Netherlands; 22 PCPs participated, in four groups (older males, older females, younger males and a group with interest with regard to euthanasia)., Results: Various phases with different emotions were distinguished: before (tension), during (loss) and after (relief) the event. Although it is a very rare occurrence, euthanasia has a major impact on PCPs. Their relationship with the patient, their loneliness, the role of the family, and pressure from society are the main issues that emerged. Making sufficient emotional space and time available to take leave adequately from a patient is important for PCPs., Conclusions: Many PCPs stressed that young physicians should form their own opinions about euthanasia and other end-of-life decisions early on in their career. We recommend that these issues are officially included in the vocational training programme for general practice.

Recent jurisprudence in the Netherlands challenges psychiatric hospitals to formulate policies on how to approach requests for assisted suicide. This study examined whether such policies exist in Dutch psychiatric hospitals and general hospitals with psychiatric wards. The directors of patient care in 38 of the country's 52 psychiatric hospitals and 42 of the 59 general hospitals with psychiatric wards responded to a mail survey. Five psychiatric hospitals and six general hospitals had written policies. Almost half of the psychiatric hospitals had a verbal policy only. The majority of the hospitals with policies had a tolerant or permissive policy toward assisted suicide.

Background: In the Netherlands, a notification procedure for physician-assisted death has been in use since 1991. It requires doctors to report each case to the coroner, who in turn notifies the public prosecutor. Ultimately, the Assembly of Prosecutors General decides whether to prosecute. Although physician-assisted death remains technically illegal, doctors are extremely unlikely to be prosecuted if they comply with the requirements for accepted practice. In 1995, the ministers of health and justice commissioned an evaluation to determine the adequacy of the notification procedure., Methods: A random sample of 405 physicians were interviewed. We also interviewed 147 physicians who had reported cases of physician-assisted death and 116 coroners, and we reviewed 353 judicial files of reported cases. In addition, we interviewed 48 public prosecutors and reviewed the minutes of the Assembly of Prosecutors General for 1991 to 1995 and all published court decisions from 1981 through 1995., Results: In 1995, about 41 percent of all cases of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide were reported. There were no major differences between reported and unreported cases in terms of the patients' characteristics, clinical conditions, or reasons for the action. Most patients had cancer and were described as suffering "unbearably" and 'hopelessly." Of the 6324 cases reported during the period from 1991 through 1995, only 13 involved prosecution of the physician. The majority of respondents in the groups interviewed thought that all cases of physician-assisted death should be reviewed, although most doctors thought the review should be performed by other doctors, and there was substantial concern about the burden associated with the reporting procedure., Conclusions: Substantial progress in the oversight of physician-assisted death has been achieved in the Netherlands. The reporting procedure could be more streamlined and less threatening.

Background: In 1991 a new procedure for reporting physician-assisted deaths was introduced in the Netherlands that led to a tripling in the number of reported cases. In 1995, as part of an evaluation of this procedure, a nationwide study of euthanasia and other medical practices concerning the end of life was begun that was identical to a study conducted in 1990., Methods: We conducted two studies, the first involving interviews with 405 physicians (general practitioners, nursing home physicians, and clinical specialists) and the second involving questionnaires mailed to the physicians attending 6060 deaths that were identified from death certificates. The response rates were 89 percent and 77 percent, respectively., Results: Among the deaths studied, 2.3 percent of those in the interview study and 2.4 percent of those in the death-certificate study were estimated to have resulted from euthanasia, and 0.4 percent and 0.2 percent, respectively, resulted from physician-assisted suicide. In 0.7 percent of cases, life was ended without the explicit, concurrent request of the patient. Pain and symptoms were alleviated with doses of opioids that may have shortened life in 14.7 to 19.1 percent of cases, and decisions to withhold or withdraw life-prolonging treatment were made in 20.2 percent. Euthanasia seems to have increased in incidence since 1990, and ending of life without the patient's explicit request to have decreased slightly. For each type of medical decision except those in which life-prolonging treatment was withheld or withdrawn, cancer was the most frequently reported diagnosis., Conclusions: Since the notification procedure was introduced, end-of-life decision making in the Netherlands has changed only slightly, in an anticipated direction. Close monitoring of such decisions is possible, and we found no signs of an unacceptable increase in the number of decisions or of less careful decision making.