Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T05:20:36.018Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Caduceus in court: Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide in The Netherlands

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 July 2009

Robert L. Schwartz
Robert L. Schwartz
Affiliation:
Professor of Law at the University of New Mexico, Albuquerque
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

As ethics committees become involved in discussing the propriety of euthanasia and assisted suicide, and as healthcare providers begin to seriously consider whether they might ever have a role in hastening the dying process, many have looked to The Netherlands as the only real example of a nation that permits (or, at least, excuses) euthanasia in limited circumstances. Unfortunately, partisans in the Dutch debate have often written about the Dutch experience as advocates rather than as neutral observers. Some have argued that euthanasia, which, they claim, is rarely actually practiced, is universally accepted within The Netherlands; others have reported that the Dutch social fabric has been rended irreparably by what they claim, is a practice far more widespread than is generally understood. The debate in the United States has also been colored by a misunderstanding of the legal regulation of euthanasia in The Netherlands.

Type
The Caduceus in court
Information
Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics , Volume 4 , Issue 1 , Winter 1995 , pp. 111 - 121
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Dillmann, RJM, Legemaate, J. Euthanasia in The Netherlands: the state of the legal debate. European journal of Health Law 1994;1:81–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

2. Leenen, HJJ. Dying with dignity; developments in the field of euthanasia in The Netherlands. Medicine and Law 1989;8:517–26.Google ScholarPubMed

3. Leenen, HJJ, Ciesielski-Carlucci, C. Force majeure (legal necessity): justification for active termination of life in the case of severely handicapped newborns after forgoing treatment. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 1993;2:271–4 (especially note 1).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

4. Pijnenborg, L, Van der Maas, PJ, Van Delden, JJM et al. , Life-terminating acts without explicit request of patient. The Lancet 1993;341:1196–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

5. Van der Wal, G. Unrequested termination of life: is it permissible? Bioethics 1993;7:330–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

6. See note 2. Leenen, . 1989;9:517–26.Google Scholar

7. Leenen, HJJ. Euthanasia in The Netherlands. In: Byrne, P, ed. Medicine, Medical Ethics and the Value of Life. Chicester/New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1990:1–14.Google Scholar

8. See note 7. Leenen, . 1990.Google Scholar

9. See note 3. Leenen, , Ciesielski-Carlucci, . 1993;2:271–4.Google Scholar

10. Royal Dutch Medical Association. Vision on Euthanasia. Utrecht: Royal Dutch Medical Association, 1984.Google Scholar

11. Van der Wal, G, Dillmann, RJM. Euthanasia in The Netherlands. British Medical Journal 1994; 308:1346–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

12. Van der Maas, PJ, Van Delden, JJM, Pijnenborg, L et al. , Euthanasia and other medical decisions concerning the end of life. The Lancet 1991;338:669–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

13. Van Delden, JJM, Pijnenborg, L, Van der Maas, PJ. The Remmelink study: two years later. Hastings Center Report 1993;23:24–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

14. See note 1. Dillmann, . 1994;1:81–7.Google Scholar

15. See note 12. Van der Maas, PJ et al. , 1991:669–74.Google Scholar

16. Ciesielski-Carlucci, C, Kimsma, G. The impact of reporting cases of euthanasia in Holland: a patient and family perspective. Bioethics 1994;8:151–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

17. See note 2. Leenen, . 1989:517–26.Google Scholar

18. Bakker, DJ. Active euthanasia: is mercy killing the killing of mercy? In: Mishin, RI, ed. Euthanasia: The Good of the Patient, the Good of Society. Frederick, Maryland: 1992:83–94.Google Scholar

19. See note 12. Van der Maas, PJ et al. , 1991:669–74.Google Scholar

20. Van Delden, JJM, Pijnenborg, L, Van der Maas, PJ. Dances with data. Bioethics 1993;7:323–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

21. See note 13. Van Delden, et al. , 1993;23:24–7.Google Scholar

22. See note 20. Van Delden, et al. , 1993;7:323–9.Google Scholar

23. Sheldon, T. Dutch prosecutors get tough on euthanasia. British Medical Journal 1994;308:1119–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

24. See note 4. Pijnenborg, L et al. , 1993;341:1196–9.Google Scholar

25. See note 5. Van der Wal, G. 1993;7:330–9.Google Scholar

26. See note 3. Leenen, HJJ, Ciesielski-Carlucci, C. 1993;2:271–4.Google Scholar

27. See note 5. Van der Wal, G. 1993;7:330–9.Google Scholar

28. Gevers, JKM. Legislation on euthanasia: recent developments in The Netherlands. Journal of Medical Ethics 1992;18:138–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

29. See note 11. Van der Wal, , Dillmann, . 1994;308:1346–9.Google Scholar

30. Ward, BJ, Tate, PA. Attitudes among NHS doctors to requests for euthanasia. British Medical Journal 1994;308:1332–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

31. Kenis, Y. Physicians and active euthanasia: practice and opinions (original in French). Bulletin du Conseil National Ordre des Medians 1994;63:53–61.Google Scholar