The National Ethics Council has intensively discussed the issues involved in dealing responsibly with dying. It has perused a large volume of material, obtained expert opinions, consulted with doctors and other medical specialists, and held meetings in Augsburg and Münster at which it exposed itself to public debate. The outcome is enshrined in the Opinion now presented. Self-determination and care at the end of life continues the examination of the themes addressed in the Opinion The advance directive published in June 2005. The present analysis, in conjunction with the clarification of terminology here proposed, may facilitate interpretation of the recommendations set out in that Opinion.
In this article, I consider whether the advance directive of a person in minimally conscious state ought to be adhered to when its prescriptions conflict with her current wishes. I argue that an advance directive can have moral significance after its issuer has succumbed to minimally conscious state. I also defend the view that the patient can still have a significant degree of autonomy. Consequently, I conclude that her advance directive ought not to be applied. Then I briefly assess whether considerations pertaining to respecting the patient's autonomy could still require obedience to the desire expressed in her advance directive and arrive at a negative answer.
Artsen menen vaak dat patiënten met een verlaagd bewustzijn niet lijden en dat euthanasie daarom niet mogelijk is. Maar in sommige situaties mag dit wel. De KNMG heeft, op verzoek van het College van procureurs-generaal en de Inspectie voor de Gezondheidszorg, een richtlijn opgesteld over euthanasie bij een verlaagd bewustzijn. Deze richtlijn brengt geen verruiming van de wet, maar heeft tot doel artsen houvast te bieden in deze moeilijke situatie. Het College heeft aangegeven dat als artsen handelen volgens deze richtlijn, er in beginsel geen reden is voor strafrechtelijk optreden.
The present paper constitutes the input of Alzheimer Europe and its member organisations to the ongoing discussions within Europe about advance directives (in the context of Alzheimer’s disease and other forms of dementia). It is the result of discussions carried out in a multidisciplinary group, comprising experts in the field of psychiatry, neurology, pharmacology, psychology, law and ethics, in collaboration with the Board of Alzheimer Europe and its member associations. Please see Annex 1 for the list of participants of the working group. Alzheimer Europe’s position on advance directives was guided by several general principles and was influenced by principles contained in pre-existing European or international documents. Please refer to section D for details. On the basis of these principles and of a review of current literature concerning issues linked to the use of advance directives, Alzheimer Europe has developed the following position with regard to advance directives.
Physician-assisted suicide laws in Oregon and Washington require the person's current competency and a prognosis of terminal illness. In The Netherlands voluntariness and unbearable suffering are required for euthanasia. Many people are more concerned about the loss of autonomy and independence in years of severe dementia than about pain and suffering in their last months. To address this concern, people could write advance directives for physician-assisted death in dementia. Should such directives be implemented even though, at the time, the person is no longer competent and would not be either terminally ill or suffering unbearably? We argue that in many cases they should be, and that a sliding scale which considers both autonomy and the capacity for enjoyment provides the best justification for determining when: when written by a previously well-informed and competent person, such a directive gains in authority as the later person's capacities to generate new critical interests a...
An international leader in bioethics, Peggy [Battin] explored the right to a good and easeful death by their own hand, if need be, for people who were terminally ill, as well as for those whose lives had become intolerable because of chronic illness, serious injury or extreme old age. She didn’t shy away from contentious words like “euthanasia.” In the weeks after the accident, Peggy found herself thinking about the title character in Tolstoy’s “Death of Ivan Ilyich,” who wondered, “What if my whole life has been wrong?” Her whole life had involved writing “wheelbarrows full” of books and articles championing self-determination in dying. And now here was her husband, a plugged-in mannequin in the I.C.U., the very embodiment of a right-to-die case study.
New report finds half of dying Britons are not dying well At a pivotal time for end of life care in Britain the need for advance care planning is reinforced Divided in Dying, a new report from charity Compassion in Dying, finds that almost half of those who have lost someone close to them through a short or long illness, feel their loved one died badly (45%). In cases where the dying person had recorded their end of life wishes, relatives and friends are more likely to report that they had a good death (58%). Alongside recording end of life wishes (19%), better communication between the doctor and their loved one (39%), co-ordination of care (33%) and being able to die in a place of their choice (31%) were also identified as key aspects which could have improved the situation for the person who died in a bad way. Compassion in Dying surveyed over 2400 British adults who were asked to recall the experience of the last relative or close friend who died.