Cargando…
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...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7035684/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31806678 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2019-105877 |
_version_ | 1783500104377827328 |
---|---|
author | Asscher, Eva Constance Alida van de Vathorst, Suzanne |
author_facet | Asscher, Eva Constance Alida van de Vathorst, Suzanne |
author_sort | Asscher, Eva Constance Alida |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7035684 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-70356842020-03-03 First prosecution of a Dutch doctor since the Euthanasia Act of 2002: what does the verdict mean? Asscher, Eva Constance Alida van de Vathorst, Suzanne J Med Ethics Current Controversy 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. BMJ Publishing Group 2020-02 2019-12-05 /pmc/articles/PMC7035684/ /pubmed/31806678 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2019-105877 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Current Controversy Asscher, Eva Constance Alida van de Vathorst, Suzanne First prosecution of a Dutch doctor since the Euthanasia Act of 2002: what does the verdict mean? |
title | First prosecution of a Dutch doctor since the Euthanasia Act of 2002: what does the verdict mean? |
title_full | First prosecution of a Dutch doctor since the Euthanasia Act of 2002: what does the verdict mean? |
title_fullStr | First prosecution of a Dutch doctor since the Euthanasia Act of 2002: what does the verdict mean? |
title_full_unstemmed | First prosecution of a Dutch doctor since the Euthanasia Act of 2002: what does the verdict mean? |
title_short | First prosecution of a Dutch doctor since the Euthanasia Act of 2002: what does the verdict mean? |
title_sort | first prosecution of a dutch doctor since the euthanasia act of 2002: what does the verdict mean? |
topic | Current Controversy |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7035684/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31806678 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2019-105877 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT asscherevaconstancealida firstprosecutionofadutchdoctorsincetheeuthanasiaactof2002whatdoestheverdictmean AT vandevathorstsuzanne firstprosecutionofadutchdoctorsincetheeuthanasiaactof2002whatdoestheverdictmean |