Improving control over euthanasia of persons with psychiatric illness: Lessons from the first Belgian criminal court case concerning euthanasia.
MAID
autism spectrum disorder (ASD)
borderline personality
end of life
ethics
euthanasia
legal
psychiatric disorders
Journal
Frontiers in psychiatry
ISSN: 1664-0640
Titre abrégé: Front Psychiatry
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101545006
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2022
2022
Historique:
received:
01
05
2022
accepted:
30
06
2022
entrez:
5
8
2022
pubmed:
6
8
2022
medline:
6
8
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Belgium is one of very few countries that legally allow euthanasia for suffering caused by psychiatric illness. In the first criminal trial in Belgium of physicians involved in euthanasia, three physicians recently faced the accusation of "murder by poisoning," for allegedly having failed to comply with several requirements of the Belgian Euthanasia Law in granting the euthanasia request a woman suffering from psychiatric illness. Although all three physicians were acquitted, the case generated much debate among policy makers, medical professionals, and the general public. We use this trial as the starting point for a critical analysis of the adequacy of the three-level control system established in the Euthanasia Law, as it is applied in the evaluation of euthanasia requests from persons who suffer unbearably from a psychiatric illness. This analysis is based on information presented during the criminal trial as well as information on the euthanasia that was published in the press. Our analysis highlights substantial problems in the assessment and granting of the euthanasia request. The patient was euthanized without it having been substantiated that her psychiatric illness had no prospect of improvement and that her suffering could not be alleviated. The three-step control system enshrined in the Law and promoted by the Federal Control and Evaluation Commission for Euthanasia appears to have failed at each level. To evaluate requests for euthanasia for mental suffering caused by psychiatric illness, the requirements of the Belgian Euthanasia Law should be complemented by mandating the advice of two psychiatrists, and face-to-face discussions between all physicians involved. In parallel with the process of evaluating the euthanasia request, a treatment track should be guaranteed where reasonable evidence-based treatments and recovery-oriented options are tried.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Belgium is one of very few countries that legally allow euthanasia for suffering caused by psychiatric illness. In the first criminal trial in Belgium of physicians involved in euthanasia, three physicians recently faced the accusation of "murder by poisoning," for allegedly having failed to comply with several requirements of the Belgian Euthanasia Law in granting the euthanasia request a woman suffering from psychiatric illness. Although all three physicians were acquitted, the case generated much debate among policy makers, medical professionals, and the general public.
Method
UNASSIGNED
We use this trial as the starting point for a critical analysis of the adequacy of the three-level control system established in the Euthanasia Law, as it is applied in the evaluation of euthanasia requests from persons who suffer unbearably from a psychiatric illness. This analysis is based on information presented during the criminal trial as well as information on the euthanasia that was published in the press.
Results
UNASSIGNED
Our analysis highlights substantial problems in the assessment and granting of the euthanasia request. The patient was euthanized without it having been substantiated that her psychiatric illness had no prospect of improvement and that her suffering could not be alleviated. The three-step control system enshrined in the Law and promoted by the Federal Control and Evaluation Commission for Euthanasia appears to have failed at each level.
Conclusion
UNASSIGNED
To evaluate requests for euthanasia for mental suffering caused by psychiatric illness, the requirements of the Belgian Euthanasia Law should be complemented by mandating the advice of two psychiatrists, and face-to-face discussions between all physicians involved. In parallel with the process of evaluating the euthanasia request, a treatment track should be guaranteed where reasonable evidence-based treatments and recovery-oriented options are tried.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35928783
doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2022.933748
pmc: PMC9343580
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
933748Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 De Hert, Loos, Sterckx, Thys and Van Assche.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
BMC Med Ethics. 2018 Mar 5;19(1):17
pubmed: 29506512
Br J Psychiatry. 2019 Nov;215(5):647-653
pubmed: 30806336
Psychol Med. 2020 Mar;50(4):575-582
pubmed: 30829194
Can J Psychiatry. 2022 Mar 21;:7067437221087052
pubmed: 35311599
Psychiatr Serv. 2021 Nov 1;72(11):1288-1300
pubmed: 34369801
J Psychiatr Res. 2021 Mar;135:153-173
pubmed: 33486164
BMC Med Ethics. 2019 Sep 2;20(1):59
pubmed: 31477106
Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2004 Jul-Aug;26(4):323-30
pubmed: 15234829
J Med Ethics. 2011 Dec;37(12):727-34
pubmed: 21947807
BMC Psychiatry. 2017 Jun 23;17(1):203
pubmed: 28641576
Front Psychol. 2016 Jan 25;6:2024
pubmed: 26834663
JAMA Psychiatry. 2016 Apr;73(4):362-8
pubmed: 26864709
BJPsych Open. 2019 Apr 10;5(3):e35
pubmed: 31530306
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2007 Jul;34(1):108-10
pubmed: 17543495
Arch Psychiatr Nurs. 2013 Oct;27(5):246-52
pubmed: 24070994
Mol Psychiatry. 2022 Jan;27(1):58-72
pubmed: 34257409
Curr Opin Psychiatry. 2017 Mar;30(2):77-84
pubmed: 28009723
Health Care Anal. 2004 Dec;12(4):251-63; discussion 265-72
pubmed: 15658081
Borderline Personal Disord Emot Dysregul. 2020 Jul 30;7:15
pubmed: 32742662
Psychotherapy (Chic). 2019 Jun;56(2):260-273
pubmed: 30869973
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2004 Mar;27(3):241-50
pubmed: 15010102
Cult Med Psychiatry. 2021 Jun;45(2):268-281
pubmed: 32833142
Lancet. 2004 Jul 31-Aug 6;364(9432):453-61
pubmed: 15288745
CNS Drugs. 2021 Oct;35(10):1053-1067
pubmed: 34495494
Lancet. 2022 Jan 15;399(10321):271-334
pubmed: 34883054
BMC Psychiatry. 2020 Aug 8;20(1):400
pubmed: 32770966
Int J Law Psychiatry. 2019 May - Jun;64:150-161
pubmed: 31122625
Child Adolesc Psychiatr Clin N Am. 2003 Jan;12(1):1-13, v
pubmed: 12512395
Autism. 2015 Oct;19(7):842-9
pubmed: 26088060
Psychooncology. 2010 Apr;19(4):339-52
pubmed: 19771571
Lancet. 2018 Aug 11;392(10146):508-520
pubmed: 30078460
Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2020 Jan 16;6(1):5
pubmed: 31949163
Can J Psychiatry. 2020 Sep;65(9):593-603
pubmed: 32427501
Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2019 Aug 9;116(33-34):545-552
pubmed: 31554543
Lancet. 2015 Feb 21;385(9969):735-43
pubmed: 25706219
Arch Intern Med. 2012 Oct 22;172(19):1501-5
pubmed: 22945389
J Med Ethics. 2020 Aug 3;:
pubmed: 32747525
Neurosci Bull. 2017 Apr;33(2):183-193
pubmed: 28213805
PLoS One. 2021 Jan 14;16(1):e0245331
pubmed: 33444397
J Med Philos. 2021 Jan 25;46(1):80-107
pubmed: 33491735
Lancet. 2021 Oct 23;398(10310):1528-1540
pubmed: 34688371
JAMA Psychiatry. 2017 Apr 01;74(4):319-328
pubmed: 28249086
PLoS One. 2015 Dec 23;10(12):e0144749
pubmed: 26700007
Autism Res. 2021 Dec;14(12):2688-2710
pubmed: 34608760
Psychol Med. 1981 Feb;11(1):115-29
pubmed: 7208735
Eur Psychiatry. 2017 Jul;44:104-124
pubmed: 28641213
PLoS One. 2017 Sep 8;12(9):e0184447
pubmed: 28886113
Mol Autism. 2018 Apr 19;9:29
pubmed: 29713442
Sci Prog. 2021 Jul-Sep;104(3):368504211029775
pubmed: 34263672
Br J Psychiatry. 2010 Feb;196(2):158-9
pubmed: 20118465
Ann Palliat Med. 2021 Mar;10(3):3540-3553
pubmed: 32921084
Lancet. 2011 Jan 1;377(9759):74-84
pubmed: 21195251
Med Health Care Philos. 2016 Mar;19(1):71-83
pubmed: 25971689
Psychol Med. 2016 Sep;46(12):2595-604
pubmed: 27353452
Tijdschr Psychiatr. 2019;61(4):241-247
pubmed: 31017282
Pharmacol Ther. 2018 Oct;190:91-104
pubmed: 29763648
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Aug 15;(8):CD005652
pubmed: 22895952
Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2016 Jul 07;12:1669-86
pubmed: 27462160
J Psychiatr Res. 2021 Dec;144:158-167
pubmed: 34638052
J Autism Dev Disord. 2001 Feb;31(1):5-17
pubmed: 11439754
J Autism Dev Disord. 2021 Dec;51(12):4253-4270
pubmed: 33624215
World Psychiatry. 2015 Jun;14(2):137-50
pubmed: 26043322
Am J Psychiatry. 2012 May;169(5):476-83
pubmed: 22737693
Tijdschr Psychiatr. 2011;53(7):405-14
pubmed: 21748705
Med Law. 2003;22(3):391-400
pubmed: 14626875
J Clin Med. 2021 Nov 29;10(23):
pubmed: 34884324
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 May 4;5:CD012955
pubmed: 32368793
N Engl J Med. 2007 Nov 1;357(18):1834-40
pubmed: 17978292
Psychosomatics. 2016 Nov - Dec;57(6):556-565
pubmed: 27590345
J Med Ethics. 2020 Dec 22;:
pubmed: 33443107
J Autism Dev Disord. 2020 Feb;50(2):592-602
pubmed: 31713072
BMJ Open. 2015 Jul 27;5(7):e007454
pubmed: 26216150
Psychiatr Q. 2020 Dec;91(4):1333-1362
pubmed: 32989635