Euthanasia in the Netherlands: a claims data cross-sectional study of geographical variation

Correlations between the euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide rates and the non-assisted suicide rates at the municipal level in the Netherlands

In the Netherlands, rates of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide (henceforth "EPAS") display substantial variation at the municipal level. If a similar variation can be found in non-assisted suicide (henceforth "suicide"), this may enable us to establish a possible correlation between these variations. This cross-sectional study assessed proportions of suicide in the years 2013-2017 in The Netherlands. Negative binomial regression analysis was performed to identify potential explanatory variables and to calculate adjusted proportions. The magnitude of variation was calculated by ratios between the highest and lowest municipality proportions. Outliers were detected by Funnel Plots. A possible correlation between suicide and EPAS was calculated. From 2013-2017 the suicide rate between Dutch municipalities varied by a factor 6.7. This variation could only be partially explained by gender, political orientation, the availability of voluntary workers, and mobility limitations. No correlation was found with the variation in EPAS. A "waterbed effect" between suicides and EPAS-cases could not be confirmed. Advice for further research is given.

Causes and Ways of Death in Patients With Head and Neck Cancer

Importance

There is limited literature on the exact causes and ways of death in patients with head and neck cancer. To provide optimal care, especially in the palliative phase, more information on this is needed.

Objective

To provide insights into the causes and ways of death among patients with head and neck cancer.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study included a consecutive population of patients who received a diagnosis of primary squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck between January 2006 and December 2013 who were treated in the Erasmus MC. Patient data were merged with nonpublic microdata from Statistics Netherlands. Follow-up time was specified as the date of diagnosis until death or December 3, 2019, whichever came first. The data were checked and reanalyzed in November 2023.

Main outcomes and Measures

Causes (eg, head and neck cancer, other cancer) and ways (eg, natural death, suicide) of death.

Results

A total of 1291 patients (59.2%; 342 women [26.5%]) died during follow-up (median [IQR] follow-up, 2.7 [1.2-5.6] years). The main cause of death was head and neck cancer (557 [43.1%]), followed by the competing cause of other cancers (344 [26.6%]). In total, 240 patients (18.6%) received palliative sedation and 70 patients (5.4%) euthanasia. Compared with patients with head and neck cancer as the underlying cause of death, lower odds ratios (ORs) were observed for receiving palliative sedation (OR, 0.32 vs 0.07; 95% CI, 0.22-0.46 vs 0.03-0.12) and euthanasia (OR, 0.22 vs 0.01; 95% CI, 0.11-0.41 vs 0-0.107) in patients with other causes of death. Patients with a middle and high income had higher ORs for receiving palliative sedation (OR, 1.46 vs 1.86; 95% CI, 1.05-2.04 vs 1.22-2.85) or euthanasia (OR, 2.25 vs 3.37; 95% CI, 1.18-4.3, 1.6-7.12) compared with low-income patients. Retired patients had lower ORs for receiving palliative sedation or euthanasia compared with employed patients (OR, 0.56 vs 0.44; 95% CI, 0.39-0.8 vs 0.24-0.82).

Conclusion and Relevance

The results of this cohort study suggest that more than half of the patients died of competing causes and palliative sedation and euthanasia were more common in patients with head and neck cancer as the underlying cause of death. Patients with a higher socioeconomic status had higher odds of receiving palliative sedation and euthanasia. These insights may support health care professionals in providing patient-centered care, especially for patients in the palliative phase.

Case report: Organ donation after euthanasia for psychiatric suffering: some of the practical and ethical lessons Martijn taught us

Euthanasia in psychiatric patients presents unique challenges, especially when combined with organ donation. In this article, the hurdles psychiatric patients might encounter after expressing their wish for organ donation after euthanasia, are discussed and illustrated by the case of Martijn, a 45-year-old psychiatric patient who altruistically donated his organs after euthanasia. Hospital and physician-related factors, including caution in determination of mental capacity, consideration of conflicting interests, and healthcare staff stress are discussed as impediments to organ donation after euthanasia (ODE) in psychiatric patients. The primary objective of this article is to raise awareness among psychiatrists regarding the fact that although the combination of euthanasia and organ donation is an uncommonly performed procedure, it is frequently requested by psychiatric patients. In conclusion, the article advocates for a nuanced approach, respecting patients' altruistic wishes while at the same time addressing challenges associated with ODE in psychiatric suffering. Where possible, and within the current medical, ethical and legal boundaries, the importance of facilitating organ donation without unnecessarily prolonging the suffering of competent psychiatric patients seeking euthanasia is emphasized. The topic calls, for example, for further qualitative research to understand the stakeholders' perspectives to determine the perceived possibilities on the one hand and boundaries on the other.

Examining assisted suicide and euthanasia through the lens of healthcare quality

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.

Foucault and medicine: challenging normative claims

Some of Michel Foucault's work focusses on an archeological and genealogical analysis of certain aspects of the medical episteme, such as 'Madness and Civilization' (1964/2001), 'The Birth of the Clinic' (1973) and 'The History of Sexuality' (1978/2020a). These and other Foucauldian works have often been invoked to characterize, but also to normatively interpret mechanisms of the currently existing medical episteme. Writers conclude that processes of patient objectification, power, medicalization, observation and discipline are widespread in various areas where the medical specialty operates and that these aspects have certain normative implications for how our society operates or should operate. The Foucauldian concepts used to describe the medical episteme and the normative statements surrounding these concepts will be critically analyzed in this paper.By using Foucault's work and several of his interpreters, I will focus on the balance between processes of subjectification and objectification and the normative implications of these processes by relating Foucault's work and the work of his interpreters to the current medical discipline. Additionally, by focusing on the discussion of death and biopower, the role of physicians in the negation and stigmatization of death is being discussed, mainly through the concept of biopower. Lastly, based on the discussion of panopticism in the medical discipline, this paper treats negative and positive forms power, and a focus will be laid upon forms of resistance against power. The discussed aspects will hopefully shed a different and critical light on the relationship between Foucault's work and medicine, something that eventually can also be deduced from Foucault's later work itself.

Frequency of euthanasia, factors associated with end-of-life practices, and quality of end-of-life care in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis in the Netherlands: a population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis is a progressive and lethal neurodegenerative disease that is at the forefront of debates on regulation of assisted dying. Since 2002, when euthanasia was legally regulated in the Netherlands, the frequency of this end-of-life practice has increased substantially from 1·7% of all deaths in 1990 and 2005 to 4·5% in 2015. We aimed to investigate whether the frequency of euthanasia in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis had similarly increased since 2002, and to assess the factors associated with end-of-life practices and the quality of end-of-life care in patients with this disease.

METHODS

Using data from the Netherlands ALS registry, we did a population-based cohort study of clinicians and informal caregivers of patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis to assess factors associated with end-of-life decision making and the quality of end-of-life care. We included individuals who were diagnosed with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis according to the revised El-Escorial criteria, and who died between Jan 1, 2014, and Dec 31, 2016. We calculated the frequency of euthanasia in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis from reports made to euthanasia review committees (ERCs) between 2012 and 2020. Results were compared with clinic-based survey studies conducted in 1994-2005. End-of-life practices were end-of-life decisions by a clinician when hastening of death was considered as the potential, probable, or definite effect comprising euthanasia, physician-assisted suicide, ending of life without explicit request, forgoing life-prolonging treatment, and intensified alleviation of symptoms.

FINDINGS

Between Jan 1, 2012, and Dec 31, 2020, 4130 reports of death from amyotrophic lateral sclerosis were made to ERCs, of which 1014 were from euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide (mean frequency 25% [SD 3] per year). Sex and gender data were unavailable from the ERC registry. Of 884 patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis who died between Jan 1, 2014, and Dec 31, 2016, their treating clinician was identified for 731 and a caregiver was identified for 741, of whom 356 (49%) and 450 (61%), respectively, agreed to participate in the population-based survey study. According to clinicians, end-of-life practices were chosen by 280 (79%) of 356 patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis who died. The frequency of euthanasia in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis in 2014-16 (141 [40%] of 356 deaths in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis) was higher than in 1994-98 (35 [17%] of 203) and 2000-05 (33 [16%] of 209). Median survival of patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis from diagnosis was 15·9 months (95% CI 12·6-17·6) for those who chose euthanasia and 16·1 months (13·4-19·1) for those who did not choose euthanasia (hazard ratio 1·07, 95% CI 0·85-1·34; p=0·58). According to caregivers, compared with other end-of-life practices, patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis choosing euthanasia commonly reported reasons to hasten death as no chance of improvement (53 [56%] of 94 patients who chose euthanasia vs 28 [39%] of 72 patients who chose other end-of-life practices), loss of dignity (47 [50%] vs 15 [21%]), dependency (34 [36%] vs five [7%]), and fatigue or extreme weakness (41 [44%] vs 14 [20%]). According to caregivers, people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis-whether they chose euthanasia or did not-were satisfied with the general quality (83 [93%] of 89 patients who chose euthanasia vs 73 [86%] of 85 patients who did not) and availability (85 [97%] of 88 vs 81 [91%] of 90) of end-of-life care.

INTERPRETATION

The proportion of patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis who chose euthanasia in the Netherlands has increased since 2002. The choice of euthanasia was not associated with disease or patient characteristics, depression or hopelessness, or the availability or quality of end-of-life care. The choice of euthanasia had no effect on overall survival. Future studies could focus on the effect of discussing end-of-life options on quality of life as part of multidisciplinary care throughout the course of the disease, to reduce feelings of loss of autonomy and dignity in patients living with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.

FUNDING

Netherlands ALS Foundation.

Organ Donation After Euthanasia in Patients Suffering From Psychiatric Disorders: 10-Years of Preliminary Experiences in the Netherlands

Euthanasia based on psychiatric suffering, followed by subsequent organ donation, is considered medically and legally permissible in the Netherlands. Although organ donation after euthanasia (ODE) in patients suffering from unbearable psychiatric illness is performed, it is not specifically addressed in the Dutch guideline on organ donation after euthanasia, and national data on ODE in psychiatric patients have not yet been published. In this article, the preliminary results of the 10-year Dutch case series of psychiatric patients who choose ODE are presented and potential factors influencing opportunities for donation in this population are discussed. We conclude that further future in-depth qualitative exploration of ODE in patients suffering from psychiatric illness and its associated ethical and practical dilemmas, including the consequences for the patient and their family and healthcare professionals, will be important to help make sense of potential barriers to donation for people undergoing euthanasia as a result of psychiatric suffering.

Attitudes toward the Legalization of Euthanasia or Physician-Assisted Suicide in South Korea: A Cross-Sectional Survey

This study aimed to investigate the general South Korean public attitudes toward the legalization of euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide (EAS) and examine the reasons underpinning these attitudes. From March–June 2021, we conducted a cross-sectional survey of a representative national sample of 1000 South Koreans aged 19 years or older. Three in four participants (76.4%) expressed positive attitudes toward the legalization of EAS. Participants who agreed with this legalization reported “meaninglessness of the rest of life” and “right to a good death” as their main reasons. Participants who disagreed with the legalization of EAS reported “respect for life”, “violation of the right to self-determination”, “risk of abuse or overuse”, and “violation of human rights” as theirs. In the multivariate logistic regression analyses, participants with poor physical status (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 1.41, 95%; confidence interval [CI]: 1.02–1.93) or comorbidity (aOR: 1.84, 95%; CI: 1.19–2.83) showed positive attitudes toward the legalization of EAS. In summary, most of the general South Korean population regards the legalization of EAS positively, especially participants with poor physical status or comorbidity.

Analysis of Factors Influencing Polish Students' Opinions on Euthanasia

Due to the continuous development of palliative care and methods of pain relief in the last moments of patients’ lives, we are faced with the question of how long we should take measures to delay inevitable death for, without providing prolonged therapy against the patient’s will. For terminally ill and people experiencing unimaginable suffering, euthanasia is considered as one of the possible options for a dignified farewell. The aim of the study was to determine the views on euthanasia in a group of students from Polish universities. Questionnaire responses were analyzed for 9686 students (79.9% of women and 20.1% of men) aged 18−35 years. Respondents were asked to complete their own questionnaire on demographic data and attitudes toward euthanasia in the case of severe terminal illness or paralysis preventing independent living. Euthanasia was significantly more acceptable among women (85% vs. 75%, p < 0.0001; 69% vs. 62%, p < 0.0001) and non-believers [98% vs. 97% (denominations other than Christian), 84% (other forms of Christianity), 69% (Roman Catholic); p < 0.0001] in every case considered. Religious affiliation was the factor that most influenced attitudes toward euthanasia. Among the other elements influencing attitudes toward euthanasia, residence and field of study were distinguished. Considering the large sample size and specific conclusions, the article should be an important argument in the discussion on euthanasia.

Why Using Religious Arguments in the Euthanasia Discussion is Problematic

In discussions about assisted dying (euthanasia, assisted suicide), those who argue ‘against’ legalisation often reason from a religious angle, whereas those ‘in favour’ adopt a secular stance. The Dutch experience is more nuanced: here, euthanasia advocacy largely originated from protestant religious believers. In this contribution, I criticise the use of religious arguments favouring any specific position. Religion may provide a heuristic context to explore norms relevant in the discussion, and religion may help us formulate our personal stance. But when it comes to societal debates (often focusing on whether or not to legalise euthanasia), we should concentrate on legal, societal, empirical, and ethical arguments that are understandable to all.