The 2002 Dutch Euthanasia law applies to patients aged 12 years and older. Developments in end-of-life care and decision-making in the last decade have sparked the debate about usefulness and necessity to extend euthanasia to include children under 12 years of age. This paper describes two opposite positions: the affirmative position of a pediatrician and expert in pediatric palliative care and the negative position of a jurist and specialist in health law.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180122000457DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

dutch law
4
law euthanasia
4
euthanasia expanded
4
expanded include
4
include children?
4
children? 2002
4
2002 dutch
4
dutch euthanasia
4
euthanasia law
4
law applies
4

Similar Publications

Background: Multiple diseases, such as Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis (AIS), present at adolescent age and the impact on quality of life (QoL) prolongs into adulthood. For the EQ-5D, a commonly used instrument to measure QoL, the current guideline is ambiguous whether the youth or adult version is to be preferred at adolescent age. To assess which is most suitable, this study tested for equivalence along predefined criteria of the youth (EQ-5D-5L) and adult (EQ-5D-Y-5L) version in an adolescent population receiving bracing therapy for AIS.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Euthanasia in dementia based on advance euthanasia directives (AEDs) is possible within the Dutch Euthanasia law. Yet, physicians struggle with the responsibility of interpreting the law's open norms in cases of advanced dementia, which includes the fulfilment of the due care criteria. This Delphi study aims to analyse arguments and seek consensus from medical, ethical and legal perspectives on ethical dilemmas in such cases.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Public Reason in Times of Corona: Countering Disinformation in the Netherlands.

Camb Q Healthc Ethics

January 2025

Erasmus School of Law and Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

Who should decide what passes for disinformation in a liberal democracy? During the COVID-19 pandemic, a committee set up by the Dutch Ministry of Health was actively blocking disinformation. The committee comprised civil servants, communication experts, public health experts, and representatives of commercial online platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn. To a large extent, vaccine hesitancy was attributed to disinformation, defined as misinformation (or data misinterpreted) with harmful intent.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: The emergence of mosquito-borne viruses (MBVs) in Europe emphasizes the need for preparedness and response plans. This requires knowledge integration and collaboration across the human, animal, vector, and environmental health domains, aligning with the One Health approach. Despite the importance of a One Health approach, engaging stakeholders from each domain remains challenging.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

The increasing use of recreational nitrous oxide ([Formula: see text]O) in the Netherlands and its link to traffic accidents highlights the need for reliable detection methods for law enforcement. This study focused on ex vivo detection of [Formula: see text]O in exhaled breath and examining its persistence in the human body. Firstly, a low-cost portable infrared based detector was selected and validated to detect [Formula: see text]O in air.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!