Should euthanasia be legal? An international survey of neonatal intensive care units staff.

OBJECTIVE: To present the views of a representative sample of neonatal doctors and nurses in 10 European countries on the moral acceptability of active euthanasia and its legal regulation. DESIGN: A total of 142 neonatal intensive care units were recruited by census (in the Netherlands, Sweden, Hungary, and the Baltic countries) or random sampling (in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom); 1391 doctors and 3410 nurses completed an anonymous questionnaire (response rates 89% and 86% respectively). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The staff opinion that the law in their country should be changed to allow active euthanasia "more than now". RESULTS: Active euthanasia appeared to be both acceptable and practiced in the Netherlands, France, and to a lesser extent Lithuania, and less acceptable in Sweden, Hungary, Italy, and Spain. More then half (53%) of the doctors in the Netherlands, but only a quarter (24%) in France felt that the law should be changed to allow active euthanasia "more than now". For 40% of French doctors, end of life issues should not be regulated by law. Being male, regular involvement in research, less than six years professional experience, and having ever participated in a decision of active euthanasia were positively associated with an opinion favouring relaxation of legal constraints. Having had children, religiousness, and believing in the absolute value of human life showed a negative association. Nurses were slightly more likely to consider active euthanasia acceptable in selected circumstances, and to feel that the law should be changed to allow it more than now. CONCLUSIONS: Opinions of health professionals vary widely between countries, and, even where neonatal euthanasia is already practiced, do not uniformly support its legalisation.

Neonatal end-of-life decision making: Physicians' attitudes and relationship with self-reported practices in 10 European countries.

CONTEXT: The ethical issues surrounding end-of-life decision making for infants with adverse prognoses are controversial. Little empirical evidence is available on the attitudes and values that underlie such decisions in different countries and cultures. OBJECTIVE: To explore the variability of neonatal physicians' attitudes among 10 European countries and the relationship between such attitudes and self-reported practice of end-of-life decisions. DESIGN AND SETTING: Survey conducted during 1996-1997 in 10 European countries (France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom, Estonia, Hungary, and Lithuania). PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1391 physicians (response rate, 89%) regularly employed in 142 neonatal intensive care units (NICUs). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Scores on an attitude scale, which measured views regarding absolute value of life (score of 0) vs value of quality of life (score of 10); self-report of having ever set limits to intensive neonatal interventions in cases of poor neurological prognosis. RESULTS: Physicians more likely to agree with statements consistent with preserving life at any cost were from Hungary (mean attitude scores, 5.2 [95% confidence interval ¿CI¿, 4.9-5.5]), Estonia (4.9 [95% CI, 4.3-5.5]), Lithuania (5.5 [95% CI, 4.8-6.1]), and Italy (5.7 [95% CI, 5.3-6.0]), while physicians more likely to agree with the idea that quality of life must be taken into account were from the United Kingdom (attitude scores, 7.4 [95% CI, 7.1-7.7]), the Netherlands (7. 3 [95% CI, 7.1-7.5]), and Sweden (6.8 [95% CI, 6.4-7.3]). Other factors associated with having a pro-quality-of-life view were being female, having had no children, being Protestant or having no religious background, considering religion as not important, and working in an NICU with a high number of very low-birth-weight newborns. Physicians with scores reflecting a more quality-of-life view were more likely to report that in their practice, they had set limits to intensive interventions in cases of poor neurological prognosis, with an adjusted odds ratio of 1.5 (95% CI, 1.3-1.7) per unit change in attitude score. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, physicians' likelihood of reporting setting limits to intensive neonatal interventions in cases of poor neurological prognosis is related to their attitudes. After adjusting for potential confounders, country remained the most important predictor of physicians' attitudes and practices. JAMA. 2000;284:2451-2459.

Treatment choices for extremely preterm infants: an international perspective.

OBJECTIVE: To compare treatment choices of neonatal physicians and nurses in 11 European countries for a hypothetical case of extreme prematurity (24 weeks' gestational age, birth weight of 560 g, Apgar score of 1 at 1 minute). STUDY DESIGN: An anonymous, self-administered questionnaire was completed by 1401 physicians (response rate, 89%) and 3425 nurses (response rate, 86%) from a large, representative sample of 143 European neonatal intensive care units. Italy, Spain, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Great Britain, Sweden, Hungary, Estonia, and Lithuania participated. RESULTS: Most physicians in every country but the Netherlands would resuscitate this baby and start intensive care. On subsequent deterioration of clinical conditions caused by a severe intraventricular hemorrhage, attitudes diverge: most neonatologists in Germany, Italy, Estonia, and Hungary would favor continuation of intensive care, whereas in the other countries some form of limitation of treatment would be the preferred choice. Parental wishes appear to play a role especially in Great Britain and the Netherlands. Nurses are more prone than doctors to withhold resuscitation in the delivery room and to ask parental opinion regarding subsequent treatment choices. CONCLUSION: An extremely premature infant is regarded as viable by most physicians, whereas after deterioration of the clinical conditions decision-making patterns vary according to country. These findings have implications for the ethical debate surrounding treatment of infants of borderline viability and for the interpretation and comparison of international statistics.