A qualitative focus group study on legal experts' views regarding euthanasia requests based on an advance euthanasia directive

• Published in: BMC medical ethics 2024-10, Vol.25 (1), p.119-11, Article 119
• Main Authors: Coers, D O, Scholten, S H, de Boer, M E, Sizoo, E M, Buijsen, M A J M, Frederiks, B J M, Leget, C J W, Hertogh, C M P M
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; Advance Directives - ethics; Advance Directives - legislation & jurisprudence; Advance euthanasia directives; Assisted suicide; Attitude of Health Personnel; Case law; Communication; Data analysis; Data collection; Decision Making; Decision-making process; Defibrillators; Dementia; Ethical aspects; Euthanasia; Euthanasia - ethics; Euthanasia - legislation & jurisprudence; Female; Focus Groups; Human rights; Humans; Information management; Judicial opinions; Laws, regulations and rules; Legal guidance; Male; Medical ethics; Medical law; Medical personnel; Middle Aged; Netherlands; Patients; People with disabilities; Physicians; Physicians - ethics; Physicians - legislation & jurisprudence; Physicians - psychology; Practice; Qualitative Research
• ISSN: 1472-6939; 1472-6939
• DOI: 10.1186/s12910-024-01111-2

The Dutch Euthanasia law permits euthanasia in patients with advanced dementia lacking decisional capacity based on advance euthanasia directives. Nevertheless, physicians encounter difficulties assessing the criteria for due care in such cases. This study explores the perspectives of legal experts on the fulfillment of these criteria and the potential for additional legal guidance to support physicians' decision-making processes. A qualitative study was conducted with legal experts. Two focus group sessions were conducted. The data analysis was conducted iteratively, with the data being interpreted using thematic content analysis and the framework method. Participants emphasize the importance of considering the patient's current wishes and informing them about the limitations of advance euthanasia directives. While representatives and healthcare professionals can assist in interpreting wishes, the final decision regarding euthanasia rests with the physician. The participants also discuss the challenges posed by pre-recorded wishes due to changing preferences. Furthermore, they present different views on the value of life wishes of patients with advanced dementia. While some participants prioritize life wishes over advance euthanasia directives, others question whether such expressions still reflect their will. Participants find it essential to assess unbearable suffering in the context of the current situation. Participants acknowledge the necessity to interpret advance euthanasia directives but also current expressions and they entrust this interpretation to physicians, viewing them as the primary authority, despite consulting multiple sources. The Dutch Euthanasia law's due care criteria are open norms -which are open in substance and require further elaboration, mostly determined on a case-by-case basis to the field standards of the profession-, placing the responsibility on physicians to interpret advance euthanasia directives and patient expressions. Despite potential support from various sources of information, there is limited additional legal guidance available to assist physicians in making decisions.