Ethical perspectives regarding Euthanasia, including in the context of adult psychiatry: a qualitative interview study among healthcare workers in Belgium.

INTRODUCTION: Previous research has explored euthanasia's ethical dimensions, primarily focusing on general practice and, to a lesser extent, psychiatry, mainly from the viewpoints of physicians and nurses. However, a gap exists in understanding the comprehensive value-based perspectives of other professionals involved in both somatic and psychiatric euthanasia. This paper aims to analyze the interplay among legal, medical, and ethical factors to clarify how foundational values shape the ethical discourse surrounding euthanasia in both somatic and psychiatric contexts. It seeks to explore these dynamics among all healthcare professionals and volunteers in Belgium. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 30 Dutch-speaking healthcare workers who had encountered patients requesting euthanasia for psychiatric conditions, in Belgium, from August 2019 to August 2020. Qualitative thematic analysis was applied to the interview transcripts. FINDINGS: Participants identified three pivotal values and virtues: religious values, professional values, and fundamental medical values encompassing autonomy, beneficence, and non-maleficence, linked to compassion, quality care, and justice. These values interwove across four tiers: the patient, the patient's inner circle, the medical realm, and society at large. Irrespective of their euthanasia stance, participants generally displayed a blend of ethical values across these tiers. Their euthanasia perspective was primarily shaped by value interpretation, significance allocation to key components, and tier weighting. Explicit mention of varying ethical values, potentially indicating distinct stances in favor of or against euthanasia, was infrequent. CONCLUSION: The study underscores ethical discourse's central role in navigating euthanasia's intricate landscape. Fostering inclusive dialogue, bridging diverse values, supports informed decision-making, nurturing justice, and empathy. Tailored end-of-life healthcare in psychiatry is essential, acknowledging all involved actors' needs. The study calls for interdisciplinary research to comprehensively grasp euthanasia's multifaceted dimensions, and guiding policy evolution. While contextualized in Belgium, the implications extend to the broader euthanasia discourse, suggesting avenues for further inquiry and cross-cultural exploration.

Mapping the ethical aspects in end-of-life care for persons with a severe and persistent mental illness: A scoping review of the literature.

Persons with severe and persistent mental illness (SPMI) make up a vulnerable group within mental healthcare and society. Not only do they suffer from long-term, serious psychiatric disorders; they often also experience considerable problems in their psychosocial functioning. Research has disclosed that the care needs of this target group are complex, and that the life expectancy of these persons is significantly lower than in the general population. Given (1) the lower life expectancy of persons with SPMI, (2) the higher suicide risk related to mental disorders, and (3) the legalization and practice of medical assistance in dying in an increasing number of countries, it is of utmost importance to map the ethical aspects and challenges of end-of-life care needs in persons with SPMI. Therefore, we charted the way end-of-life care is provided for them by means of a scoping review of the scientific literature, with an emphasis on the ethical aspects surrounding it. We explore existing ethical dilemmas; the underlying ethical values, principles and attitudes; and the locus and stakeholders of ethical dialog regarding end-of-life care in persons with SPMI. The results indicate that the four guiding principles of biomedical ethics can well be identified in the literature, and are each addressed in their own specific way: Autonomy in relation to questions regarding the decision-making capacity of persons with SPMI; Justice in relation to access to quality care and the presence of stigma; and Non-maleficence and Beneficence in relation to the ongoing debate regarding the benefits and obstacles in applying palliative care approaches in the context of psychiatry, and the status of the futility-concept therein. Personal virtues and attitudes in care professionals, like compassion, non-abandonment and upholding dignity are key, as care professionals are the main advocates of persons with SPMI, which often lack an extensive social network. Further, we find that the ethical dialog is mainly focused on care professionals and relatives, rather than the persons with SPMI themselves. This is reflected in the existing research that often had the voices of the latter missing. Future research may benefit from the inclusion of persons with SMPI's first-hand accounts. End-of-life care for persons with SPMI may benefit from identifying and integrating (locally developed) good practices like cross-sectoral education, specific care models, and ethics support.

The impact of the euthanasia assessment procedure: a qualitative interview study among adults with psychiatric conditions.

BACKGROUND: Assisted dying for adults with psychiatric conditions (APC) is highly controversial but legally possible in a few countries, including Belgium. Previous research has suggested that the complex euthanasia assessment procedure may cause additional suffering in APC but may also induce positive experiences. This study reports on the impact of the euthanasia assessment procedure as experienced by APC on three counts: 1) their mental state, including death ideation; 2) their treatment trajectory; 3) their social relationships. METHODS: We performed an in-depth qualitative interview study with 16 APC in Flanders, Belgium, who had voiced a euthanasia request between 2016-2020. Thematic coding was used. FINDINGS: We interviewed 16 APC. Euthanasia assessment procedures brought out a plethora of experiences in APC, both favourable and unfavourable. Whereas thoughts of suicide remain present to a certain extent, being in the assessment procedure allows some APC to reconsider alternatives towards life, and also to attempt new treatment options. However, many APC experience ambivalence about the supposedly inherent desirability and dignity in euthanasia. Worries also surfaced about the rationale behind and effects of involvement of APCs' social circle, and about the impact it could have on them. CONCLUSION: Further research, including other stakeholder perspectives, is recommended with a view to maximising favourable and minimising unfavourable impacts for all involved. In clinical practice attention to these impacts is paramount, and clear communication and management of expectations between physician and patient, seems appropriate to address the many ambivalent experiences that accompany APC during the euthanasia assessment procedure. Policy attention could in this regard go to clarifying certain sources of ambivalence and issues that are insufficiently addressed, such as modalities of relatives' involvement.

Concrete Experiences and Support Needs Regarding the Euthanasia Practice in Adults With Psychiatric Conditions: A Qualitative Interview Study Among Healthcare Professionals and Volunteers in Belgium.

Objective: Although euthanasia in the context of adult psychiatry is legalized in Belgium, it poses major ethical and clinical challenges for the health care professionals and volunteers involved. This study aimed to address these members' concrete experiences and support needs. Methods: A qualitative semi-structured interview study was conducted with 16 physicians and 14 other health care professionals and volunteers, with at least one concrete experience with euthanasia requests and procedures concerning adults with psychiatric conditions. Findings: Concrete experiences concerned the following 8 domains: (1) the impact of euthanasia on the clinical trajectory and (2) on the therapeutic relationship, (3) internal and (4) external collaborative partnerships, (5) patients' social inner circle (non-)involvement, (6) the use of recently published guidelines and, (7) the first criminal trials on this topic, and (8) the act of euthanasia. The following 8 main support needs emerged; (1) protocols addressing specific sub-populations and pathologies, (2) protocols specifically drawn up for non-medics, (3) guidance on how to adequately implement the two-track approach, (4) (after)care for patients, (5) (after)care for the health care team, (6) guidance on the patient's social inner circle involvement, (7) enhanced education measures, and (8) enhanced financial measures, including incentives for holistic, palliative care approaches. Conclusion: The health care professionals and volunteers reported many positive and negative experiences in dealing with euthanasia requests in adult psychiatry. They reported several support needs across the extensive euthanasia trajectory, pertaining to concrete management of thorny issues that guidelines do not (yet) touch on. Important implications of our study relate to tackling these existing issues, and to paying sufficient attention to the impact of a euthanasia trajectory on all actors, including the patients and their social inner circle, involved.

Why adults with psychiatric conditions request euthanasia: A qualitative interview study of life experiences, motives and preventive factors.

OBJECTIVE: As the empirical picture of adults with psychiatric conditions (further referred to as 'patients') requesting euthanasia is still incomplete, this study aims to deepen our understanding of why these patients request euthanasia, how this relates to the option of suicide, and what could have prevented these patients from considering death and requesting euthanasia. METHODS: A qualitative study using in-depth, face-to-face interviews was conducted with 16 patients who had their euthanasia request under assessment in the period 2016-2020. Thematic coding was used. FINDINGS: Most patients were in a state of feeling emotionally worn-out as a result of the many accumulated misfortunes and setbacks, leading to the all-pervasive sense that life is no longer worth living. Whereas some patients reported lifelong adversity, others struggled predominantly in later life. Whereas some patients longed for death strongly, others expressed ambivalence towards death ideation, and some even requested euthanasia to hear of their ineligibility for it, to restore hope and to (re)find meaning in life. patients valued euthanasia over suicide as being more dignified and acceptable, both for themselves and for their inner circle. With regard to preventive factors, patients posited the need for improved accessibility and quality of mental healthcare, as well as a profound change in society's perception of, and support for, these patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed the many complexities of euthanasia in the context of psychiatry, due to the many differences in patients' background characteristics, in their motives for requesting euthanasia, and the multi-layered aspects of mental suffering that go beyond the field of psychiatry.

Euthanasia in adults with psychiatric conditions: A descriptive study of the experiences of Belgian psychiatrists.

To investigate the experience of psychiatrists who completed assessment procedures of euthanasia requests from adults with psychiatric conditions (APC) over the last 12 months. Between November 2018 and April 2019 a cross-sectional survey was sent to a sample of 753 psychiatrists affiliated with Belgian organisations of psychiatrists to gather detailed information on their latest experience with a completed euthanasia assessment procedure, irrespective of its outcome (i.e. euthanasia being performed or not). Information on 46 unique cases revealed that most APC suffered from comorbid psychiatric and/or somatic disorders, and had received different kinds of treatment for many years prior to their euthanasia request. Existential suffering was the main reason for the request. The entire procedure spanned an average of 14 months, and an average of 13.5 months in the 23 cases that culminated in the performance of euthanasia. In all cases, the entire procedure entailed multidisciplinary consultations, including with family and friends. Psychiatrists reported fewer difficulties in assessing due care criteria related to the APC's self-contemplation - for example, unbearable suffering on top of the due care criteria related to their medical condition; incurability due to lack of reasonable treatment perspectives. In a few cases in which euthanasia was the outcome, not all legal criteria were fulfilled in the reporting physicians' opinions. Both positive and negative experiences of the assessment procedure were reported: for example, reduced suicide risk for the APC; an emotional burden and a feeling of being pressured for the psychiatrist. This study confirms that euthanasia assessment in APC entails a lengthy process with diverse complexities, and psychiatrists require support in more than one respect if the assessments are to be handled adequately. Thorough evaluation of current guidelines is recommended: that is, to what extent the guidelines sufficiently address the complexities around (e.g.) assessing legal criteria or involving relatives. We formulate various avenues for further research to build on this study's insights and to fill remaining knowledge gaps.

The engagement of psychiatrists in the assessment of euthanasia requests from psychiatric patients in Belgium: a survey study.

BACKGROUND: Since its legalisation in 2002, the number of times euthanasia has been carried out in response to requests from adults with psychiatric conditions (APC) has continued to increase. However, little is known about why and how psychiatrists become engaged in the assessment of such euthanasia requests. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey study was conducted between November 2018 and April 2019 of 499 psychiatrists affiliated with the Flemish Psychiatry Association. Chi square/Fisher's exact tests were performed to examine if, and to what extent, psychiatrists' backgrounds relate to their concrete experiences. The answers to the open question regarding motives for (non-) engagement were thematically coded. RESULTS: Two hundred one psychiatrists participated, a response rate of 40%. During their careers, 80% of those responding have been confronted with at least one euthanasia request from an APC patient and 73% have become involved in the assessment procedure. Their engagement was limited to the roles of: referring physician (in 44% of the psychiatrists), attending physician (30%), legally required 'advising physician' (22%), and physician participating in the actual administration of the lethal drugs (5%). Within the most recent 12 months of practice, 61% of the respondents have been actively engaged in a euthanasia assessment procedure and 9% have refused at least once to be actively engaged due to their own conscientious objections and/or the complexity of the assessment. The main motive for psychiatrists to engage in euthanasia is the patient's fundamental right in Belgian law to ask for euthanasia and the psychiatrist's duty to respect that. The perception that they were sufficiently competent to engage in a euthanasia procedure was greater in psychiatrists who have already had concrete experience in the procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Although the majority of psychiatrists have been confronted with euthanasia requests from their APC patients, their engagement is often limited to referring the request to a colleague physician for further assessment. More research is needed to identify the determinants of a psychiatrist's engagement in euthanasia for their APC patients and to discover the consequences of their non-, or their restricted or full engagement, on both the psychotherapeutic relationship and the course of the euthanasia request.

Belgian psychiatrists' attitudes towards, and readiness to engage in, euthanasia assessment procedures with adults with psychiatric conditions: a survey.

BACKGROUND: Although the Belgian assessment pathway for legal euthanasia requires the engagement of at least one psychiatrist, little is known about psychiatrists' attitudes towards euthanasia for adults with psychiatric conditions (APC). This study aims to gauge psychiatrists' attitudes towards and readiness to engage in euthanasia assessment and/or performance procedures in APC. METHODS: This cross-sectional survey study was performed between November 2018 and April 2019. The survey was sent to a sample of 499 eligible psychiatrists affiliated to the Flemish Association for Psychiatry, a professional association that aims to unite and represent all psychiatrists working in Flanders, the Dutch-speaking, northern part of Belgium. The Association's members comprise an estimated 80-90% of all psychiatrists active in Flanders. Only psychiatrists working with APC (83% of the association's total membership) were included. Factorial Anova and Chi Square tests were performed to examine if and to what extent psychiatrists' backgrounds were associated with, respectively, their attitudes and their readiness to play a role in euthanasia procedures concerning APC. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-four psychiatrists completed the questionnaire (response rate 40.2%); 74.5% agree that euthanasia should remain permissible for APC. However, 68.9% question some of the approaches taken by other physicians during the euthanasia assessment and only half consider euthanasia assessment procedures compatible with the psychiatric care relationship. Where active engagement is concerned, an informal referral (68%) or preliminary advisory role (43.8%) is preferred to a formal role as a legally required advising physician (30.3%), let alone as performing physician (< 10%). CONCLUSION: Although three quarters agree with maintaining the legal option of euthanasia for APC, their readiness to take a formal role in euthanasia procedures appears to be limited. More insight is required into the barriers preventing engagement and what psychiatrists need, be it education or clarification of the legal requirements, to ensure that patients can have their euthanasia requests assessed adequately.

Towards an assessment instrument for suffering in patients with psychiatric conditions: assessing cognitive validity.

BACKGROUND: Unbearable suffering is a key criterion in legally granting patients' euthanasia requests in Belgium yet a generally accepted definition of unbearable suffering remains elusive. The ability to understand and assess unbearable suffering is essential, particularly in patients with psychiatric conditions, as the underlying causes of these conditions are not always apparent. To enable research into when and why suffering experiences incite patients with psychiatric conditions to request euthanasia, and to help explore preventive and curative perspectives, the development of an assessment instrument is needed. AIMS: To improve the cognitive validity of a large initial item pool used to assess the nature and extent of suffering in patients with psychiatric conditions. METHOD: Cognitive validity was established via two rounds of cognitive interviews with patients with psychiatric conditions with (n = 9) and without (n = 5) euthanasia requests. RESULTS: During the first round of cognitive interviews, a variety of issues relating to content, form and language were reported and aspects that were missing were identified. During the second round, the items that had been amended were perceived as sufficiently easily to understand, sensitive to delicate nuances, comprehensive and easy to answer accurately. Neither research topic nor method were perceived as emotionally strenuous, but instead as positive, relevant, comforting and valuable. CONCLUSIONS: This research resulted in an item pool that covers the concept of suffering more adequately and comprehensively. Further research endeavours should examine potential differences in suffering experiences over time and in patients with psychiatric conditions with and without euthanasia requests. The appreciation patients demonstrated regarding their ability to speak extensively and openly about their suffering and wish to die further supports the need to allow patients to speak freely and honestly during consultations. DECLARATION OF INTERESTS: None.

Psychiatric patients requesting euthanasia: Guidelines for sound clinical and ethical decision making.

BACKGROUND: Since Belgium legalised euthanasia, the number of performed euthanasia cases for psychological suffering in psychiatric patients has significantly increased, as well as the number of media reports on controversial cases. This has prompted several healthcare organisations and committees to develop policies on the management of these requests. METHOD: Five recent initiatives that offer guidance on euthanasia requests by psychiatric patients in Flanders were analysed: the protocol of Ghent University Hospital and advisory texts of the Flemish Federation of Psychiatry, the Brothers of Charity, the Belgian Advisory Committee on Bioethics, and Zorgnet-Icuro. These were examined via critical point-by-point reflection, focusing on all legal due care criteria in order to identify: 1) proposed measures to operationalise the evaluation of the legal criteria; 2) suggestions of additional safeguards going beyond these criteria; and 3) remaining fields of tension. RESULTS: The initiatives are well in keeping with the legal requirements but are often more stringent. Additional safeguards that are formulated include the need for at least two positive advices from at least two psychiatrists; an a priori evaluation system; and a two-track approach, focusing simultaneously on the assessment of the patient's euthanasia request and on that person's continuing treatment. Although the initiatives are similar in intent, some differences in approach were found, reflecting different ethical stances towards euthanasia and an emphasis on practical clinical assessment versus broad ethical reflection. CONCLUSIONS: All initiatives offer useful guidance for the management of euthanasia requests by psychiatric patients. By providing information on, and proper operationalisations of, the legal due care criteria, these initiatives are important instruments to prevent potential abuses. Apart from the additional safeguards suggested, the importance of a decision-making policy that includes many actors (e.g. the patient's relatives and other care providers) and of good aftercare for the bereaved are rightly stressed. Shortcomings of the initiatives relate to the aftercare of patients whose euthanasia request is rejected, and to uncertainty regarding the way in which attending physicians should manage negative or conflicting advices, or patients' suicide threats in case of refusal. Given the scarcity of data on how thoroughly and uniformly requests are handled in practice, it is unclear to what extent the recommendations made in these guidelines are currently being implemented.

When unbearable suffering incites psychiatric patients to request euthanasia: qualitative study.

BackgroundThe concept of 'unbearable suffering' is central to legislation governing whether euthanasia requests may be granted, but remains insufficiently understood, especially in relation to psychiatric patients.AimsTo provide insights into the suffering experiences of psychiatric patients who have made a request for euthanasia.MethodTestimonials from 26 psychiatric patients who requested euthanasia were analysed using QualiCoder software.ResultsFive domains of suffering were identified: medical, intrapersonal, interpersonal, societal and existential. Hopelessness was confirmed to be an important contributor. The lengthy process of applying for euthanasia was a cause of suffering and added to experienced hopelessness, whereas encountering physicians who took requests seriously could offer new perspectives on treatment.ConclusionsThe development of measurement instruments to assess the nature and extent of suffering as experienced by psychiatric patients could help both patients and physicians to better navigate the complicated and sensitive process of evaluating requests in a humane and competent way. Some correlates of suffering (such as low income) indicate the need for a broad medical, societal and political debate on how to reduce the burden of financial and socioeconomic difficulties and inequalities in order to reduce patients' desire for euthanasia. Euthanasia should never be seen (or used) as a means of resolving societal failures.

Euthanasia requests, procedures and outcomes for 100 Belgian patients suffering from psychiatric disorders: a retrospective, descriptive study.

OBJECTIVES: To identify patterns in euthanasia requests and practices relating to psychiatric patients; to generate recommendations for future research. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of data obtained through medical file review. SETTING: Outpatient psychiatric clinical setting in the Dutch-speaking region of Belgium, between October 2007 and December 2011; follow-up at the end of December 2012. PARTICIPANTS: 100 consecutive psychiatric patients requesting euthanasia based on psychological suffering associated with psychiatric disorders (77 women, 23 men; mean age 47 years; age range 21-80 years). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patient sociodemographic characteristics; diagnoses; decisions on euthanasia requests; circumstances of euthanasia procedures; patient outcomes at follow-up. RESULTS: Most patients had been referred for psychiatric counselling by their physician (n=55) or by LEIF (Life End Information Forum) (n=36). 90 patients had >1 disorder; the most frequent diagnoses were depression (n=58) and personality disorder (n=50). 38 patients required further testing and/or treatment, including 13 specifically tested for autism spectrum disorder (ASD); 12 received an ASD diagnosis (all Asperger syndrome). In total, 48 of the euthanasia requests were accepted and 35 were carried out. Of the 13 remaining patients whose requests were accepted, 8 postponed or cancelled the procedure, because simply having this option gave them enough peace of mind to continue living. In December 2012, 43 patients had died, including 35 by euthanasia; others died by suicide (6), palliative sedation (1) and anorexia nervosa (1). CONCLUSIONS: Depression and personality disorders are the most common diagnoses in psychiatric patients requesting euthanasia, with Asperger syndrome representing a neglected disease burden. Further research is needed, especially prospective quantitative and qualitative studies, to obtain a better understanding of patients with psychiatric disorders who request euthanasia due to unbearable psychological suffering.