| Literature DB >> 11654944 |
Chris Ciesielski-Carlucci, Gerrit Kimsma.
Abstract
In 1991 the Dutch government released the results of the first national investigation into the nature and extent of decisions concerning end of life including euthanasia. A significant finding was that most cases of euthanasia were not reported. This prompted us to ask what effect, if any, not reporting caused. More specifically, we asked whether reporting has a positive or negative impact on the experiences of friends or relatives of patients who have received euthanasia. In cases of euthanasia, complications of both process and experience can deter from a minimally complicated death. These difficulties arise when either the family or physician does not perceive the freedom to disclose euthanasia openly. On the basis of interviews with family members and patients, we illustrate that they generally benefit from reporting. Our premise is that reporting fosters open discussion of euthanasia. We further suggest physicians and society benefit from a milieu of openness initiated by reporting cases of euthanasia.Entities:
Keywords: Death and Euthanasia; Empirical Approach; Professional Patient Relationship; Remmelink Commission
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 1994 PMID: 11654944 DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8519.1994.tb00251.x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Bioethics ISSN: 0269-9702 Impact factor: 1.898