Should Pediatric Euthanasia Be Legalized?

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Should Pediatric Euthanasia Be Legalized? Marije Brouwer, MA,a, b Christopher Kaczor, PhD, c Margaret P. Battin, MFA, PhD, d ShouldEls Maeckelberghe, PhD, Pediatric a John D. Lantos, MD, e Eduard Euthanasia Verhagen, MD, JD, PhDb be Legalized? abstract Voluntary active euthanasia for adults at their explicit request has been legal in Belgium and the Netherlands since 2002. In those countries, acceptance of the practice for adults has been followed by acceptance of the practice for children. Opponents of euthanasia see this as a dangerous slippery slope. Proponents argue that euthanasia is sometimes ethically appropriate for minors and that, with proper safeguards, it should be legally available in appropriate circumstances for patients at any age. In this Ethics Rounds, we asked philosophers from the United States and the Netherlands, and a Dutch pediatrician, to discuss the ethics of legalizing euthanasia for children. Voluntary active euthanasia for to discuss the ethics of legalizing adults at their explicit request euthanasia for children. aInstitute for Medical Education and bDepartment of Pediatrics, University Medical Center Groningen, University has been legal in Belgium1 and the THE CASE of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands; cDepartment of Netherlands since 2002. Euthanasia, Philosophy, Loyola Marymount University, Los Angeles, voluntary or nonvoluntary, remains California; dDepartment of Philosophy, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah; and eChildren’s Mercy Hospital, Kansas illegal in the United States, although Adults and children of 12 years of City, Missouri several states have legalized age and older can legally request physician-assisted aid in dying for euthanasia in the Netherlands under All authors contributed to the design of this article, the drafting of the manuscript, and the review of adults. No US state permits assisted the 2002 Euthanasia Law. Requests for the manuscript and approved the final version. dying or euthanasia for minors. euthanasia often come from patients DOI: https:// doi. org/ 10. 1542/ peds. 2017- 1343 Opponents of assisted suicide and experiencing unbearable suffering euthanasia often claim that the with no prospect of improvement. Accepted for publication Apr 25, 2017 legalization of such practices for Their requests must be made earnestly Address correspondence to John D. Lantos, MD, competent adults will begin a slide and with full conviction and are only Children’s Mercy Hospital, 2401 Gillham Rd, Kansas City, MO 64108. E-mail: [email protected] down a slippery slope, leading to the honored if patients and their doctors legalization of voluntary euthanasia see euthanasia as the only escape PEDIATRICS (ISSN Numbers: Print, 0031-4005; Online, 1098-4275). or physician-assisted death for from the situation. Acts of euthanasia patients who cannot consent. are reported to the Ministry of Health Copyright © 2018 by the American Academy of Pediatrics In Belgium and the Netherlands, and are reviewed to ensure that they comply with the law. In addition, since FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: The authors have acceptance of the practice in adults indicated they have no financial relationships has been followed by acceptance of 2005, neonatal euthanasia for infants relevant to this article to disclose. <1 year of age has been permitted by the practice for children. But is that FUNDING: No external funding. a slippery slope, and is it necessarily a policy known as the 2005 Groningen Protocol. POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST: The authors a bad thing? Proponents argue that have indicated they have no potential conflicts of euthanasia is sometimes ethically In the past 10 years, 2 cases of interest to disclose. appropriate and that, with proper neonatal euthanasia were reported, safeguards, access to it should not be and in the last 15 years, 7 cases of To cite: Brouwer M, Kaczor C, Battin MP, et al. limited by age. Others disagree. In this euthanasia in minors between 12 and Should Pediatric Euthanasia be Legalized?. Pedi­ Ethics Rounds, we asked philosophers 18 years old have been reported. The atrics. 2018;141(2):e20171343 from the United States and the majority of cases concerned children Netherlands, and a Dutch pediatrician, with terminal cancer. All cases were Downloaded from www.aappublications.org/news by guest on September 30, 2021 PEDIATRICS Volume 141, number 2, February 2018:e20171343 ETHICS ROUNDS retrospectively assessed by a but certain side effect. Although it the end of life, especially those who multidisciplinary review committee is true that increasing the dosage choose not to kill themselves. and considered appropriate. Nobody of the sedatives may be necessary “ ” was prosecuted. over time to continue to relieve Moreover, euthanasia is not properly suffering, relieving suffering in this Dutch pediatricians and several described as relieving suffering. way is ethically permissible, even parent groups have argued that A suffering person who is relieved if death as a side effect occurs. (For severely ill children between 1 and of suffering is in a position to more on why this distinction is 12 years of age and their families are ’ experience the relief of suffering. But legally and ethically important, see denied access to the same provisions Euthanasia Examined a person who is killed is dead, and the legal philosopher John Keown s as newborns and older children so such a person no longer has any , Cambridge without good reason. They suggest bodily experiences. The corpse of a University Press.) reevaluation of the current legal person who has been killed neither situation and propose to extend the All people of good will agree that we feels pain nor the relief of the pain. A newborn regulation to all children should alleviate suffering. It is the corpse feels nothing. Indeed, human who are 1 to 12 years of age. The legalization of euthanasia and its beings who are killed no longer exist Minister of Health is considering expansion to new classes of persons, at all, so euthanasia does not relieve transformation of these propositions not its criminalization, that hampers their suffering. into new regulation. achieving this goal. If we kill patients You are asked to advise the Minister rather than relieving their pain, the Moreover, most philosophers draw practice of euthanasia undermines of Health. What advice would you ’ an important distinction between the practice of palliative care. Why Christophergive? Kaczor, PhD, Comments voluntary and nonvoluntary worry about alleviating someone s euthanasia. In voluntary euthanasia, pain, when we can simply kill the a competent patient chooses to die on person? The more people who the basis of his or her own evaluation I would advise the Minister of Health choose euthanasia and the more of his or her life. In nonvoluntary not to expand the range of cases in euthanasia is nonvoluntarily imposed euthanasia, no such consent is which intentional killing of innocent on patients, the less incentive given. Children <12 years of age are human beings is permitted by law. there is to improve methods of incapable of giving informed consent Defenders of the Dutch law palliative care. The more physicians for meaningful life decisions. For this permitting intentional killing practice euthanasia, the less these reason, we do not permit children of infants as well as adults and physicians practice relieving pain. <12 years of age to consent to their children 12 years of age and older The more people there are who “ own sterilization, to vote in elections, presuppose an empirical claim: die of euthanasia, the fewer people to join the military, to get married, ” ’ killing a person is the only escape there will be who demand greater or to have sexual intercourse. The from the situation of unbearable palliative care. If demand for choice to end one s own life or ’ suffering. This claim is false. Terminal palliative care is dampened, there is to authorize another person to sedation is a contemporary technique less financial incentive for developing end one s own life is much more of palliative care in which a person new methods of alleviating pain. The serious than the choice to join the who was suffering is relieved of pain more euthanasia is expanded, the military, to get married, or to have entirely by the continuous infusion less pressure there will be to improve sexual intercourse because those ’ of sedatives that entirely relieve palliative care, because killing will be decisions can be reversed and do not all pain. Terminal sedation can be seen as a simpler, cheaper option. completely change an individual s administered to infants, children, or Perhaps worst of all, expanding life in every respect. Current Dutch adults who are suffering and cannot the scope of legalized euthanasia law does allow for nonvoluntary be cured of their disease. If we care undermines compassion for those euthanasia of infants, an allowance about suffering people, let us relieve “ who suffer. Some people will think, incompatible with the principles of their suffering rather than killing or even say, Euthanasia is legal, justice because such infants do not them. but this person did not choose it. consent to have their lives ended. If Eventually, terminal sedation leads If she is refusing euthanasia and is all persons are to have equal rights to death. Over time, the dosage of choosing to suffer rather than die, and deserve equal protection of the that is her problem. Why should we law, then disabled persons (whether sedatives must be increased. At a ” certain point, the dosage may be so help her when she is not even helping they are infants, children, or adults) high that the death of the patient herself? Legalizing euthanasia deserve the same basic protections may be foreseen as an unintended endangers and undermines those at from intentional homicide. Downloaded from www.aappublications.org/news by guest on September 30, 2021 2 BROUWER et al Margaret P. Battin, PhD, Comments That allowing this practice would understanding, and the willingness lead to wholesale killing of children to help someone who wishes to avoid My Dear Minister of Health, 1 to 12 years of age.
Recommended publications
  • Global Experience Shows Physician-Assisted Suicide
    ISSUE BRIEF No. 4383 | APRIL 14, 2015 Global Experience Shows that Physician-Assisted Suicide Threatens the Weak and Marginalized Ryan T. Anderson, PhD llowing physician-assisted suicide (PAS) would The Task Force members unanimously conclud- Abe a grave mistake for four reasons, as explained ed that legalizing assisted suicide and euthanasia in a Heritage Foundation Backgrounder, “Always would pose profound risks to many patients.… Care, Never Kill.”1 First, it would endanger the weak and vulnerable. Second, it would corrupt the prac- tice of medicine and the doctor–patient relationship. …The practices will pose the greatest risks to Third, it would compromise the family and intergen- those who are poor, elderly, members of a minori- erational commitments. And fourth, it would betray ty group, or without access to good medical care.… human dignity and equality before the law. Instead of helping people to kill themselves, we should offer them appropriate medical care and human presence. …The clinical safeguards that have been proposed This Issue Brief focuses on how PAS threatens to prevent abuse and errors would not be realized the weak and marginalized. It explores who is most in many cases.2 likely to be coaxed into PAS and how PAS has led to voluntary—and even involuntary—euthanasia in The people most likely to be assisted by a physi- Europe. This lethal logic has even been extended to cian in their suicide are suffering not simply from children and the non-terminally ill disabled. terminal illness, but also from depression, men- tal illness, loneliness, and despair. “Researchers Physician-Assisted Suicide Threatens the have found hopelessness, which is strongly cor- Weak and Marginalized related with depression, to be the factor that most Physician-assisted suicide will most threaten significantly predicts the wish for death,” write the weak and marginalized because of the cultural Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Should Pediatric Euthanasia Be Legalized?
    Marije Brouwer, MA,a, b Christopher Kaczor, PhD, c Margaret P. Battin, MFA, PhD, d ShouldEls Maeckelberghe, PhD, Pediatric a John D. Lantos, MD, e Eduard Euthanasia Verhagen, MD, JD, PhDb be Legalized? abstract Voluntary active euthanasia for adults at their explicit request has been legal in Belgium and the Netherlands since 2002. In those countries, acceptance of the practice for adults has been followed by acceptance of the practice for children. Opponents of euthanasia see this as a dangerous slippery slope. Proponents argue that euthanasia is sometimes ethically appropriate for minors and that, with proper safeguards, it should be legally available in appropriate circumstances for patients at any age. In this Ethics Rounds, we asked philosophers from the United States and the Netherlands, and a Dutch pediatrician, to discuss the ethics of legalizing euthanasia for children. Voluntary active euthanasia for to discuss the ethics of legalizing adults at their explicit request euthanasia for children. aInstitute for Medical Education and bDepartment of Pediatrics, University Medical Center Groningen, University has been legal in Belgium1 and the THE CASE of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands; cDepartment of Netherlands since 2002. Euthanasia, Philosophy, Loyola Marymount University, Los Angeles, voluntary or nonvoluntary, remains California; dDepartment of Philosophy, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah; and eChildren’s Mercy Hospital, Kansas illegal in the United States, although Adults and children of 12 years of City, Missouri several states have legalized age and older can legally request physician-assisted aid in dying for euthanasia in the Netherlands under All authors contributed to the design of this article, the drafting of the manuscript, and the review of adults.
    [Show full text]
  • What We Talk About When We Talk About Pediatric Suffering
    Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics https://doi.org/10.1007/s11017-020-09535-8 What we talk about when we talk about pediatric sufering Tyler Tate1 Accepted: 5 December 2020 © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V. part of Springer Nature 2021 Abstract In this paper I aim to show why pediatric sufering must be understood as a judg- ment or evaluation, rather than a mental state. To accomplish this task, frst I ana- lyze the various ways that the label of sufering is used in pediatric practice. Out of this analysis emerge what I call the twin poles of pediatric sufering. At one pole sits the belief that infants and children with severe cognitive impairment cannot sufer because they are nonverbal or lack subjective life experience. At the other pole exists the idea that once child sufering reaches some threshold it is ethical to eliminate the suferer. Concerningly, at both poles, any particular child vanishes from view. Sec- ond, in an attempt to identify a theory of sufering inclusive of children, I examine two prominent so-called experiential accounts of sufering. I fnd them both want- ing on account of their absurd entailments and their fawed assumptions regarding the subjective experiences of people who cannot communicate expressively. Finally, I extend arguments found in Alastair MacIntyre’s Dependent Rational Animals to argue that child sufering can be understood only as a set of absences—absences of conditions such as love, warmth, and freedom from pain. An evaluation of these absences reveals the exquisite dependency of children. It also discloses why pediat- ric sufering is necessarily a social and political event.
    [Show full text]
  • Ethical Considerations of Newborn Euthanasia: a Quality of Life Approach
    ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS OF NEWBORN EUTHANASIA: A QUALITY OF LIFE APPROACH by Tomas Bednar BA Philosophy and English Literature, University of Pittsburgh, 2008 Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the School of Arts and Sciences in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Bioethics University of Pittsburgh 2010 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Center for Bioethics and Health Law This thesis was presented by Tomas Bednar It was defended on November 24th, 2010 and approved by Alan Meisel, JD, Professor of Law and Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh Valerie B. Satkoske, MSW, PhD, Affiliate Faculty, Center for Bioethics and Health Law, University of Pittsburgh Thesis Director: Lisa S. Parker, PhD, Associate Professor, Center for Bioethics and Health Law, University of Pittsburgh ii Copyright © by Tomas Bednar 2010 iii ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS OF NEWBORN EUTHANASIA: A QUALITY OF LIFE APPROACH Tomas Bednar, M.A. University of Pittsburgh, 2010 This thesis develops the proper role of quality of life assessments in situations of newborn euthanasia. Initially spurred by the Groningen Protocol of the Netherlands, which was a protocol outlining the criteria for non-voluntary newborn euthanasia of seriously ill or impaired newborns, this paper considers the practice of newborn euthanasia within the context of the current decision making frameworks already in place in this country. Specifically, this paper relies on informed consent and the best interest model as well as the generally accepted respect for parental authority in medical decision making. In light of these current standards of practice, this paper argues that in order for newborn euthanasia to be ethically permissible, it must be split into two primary decision making processes.
    [Show full text]
  • Neonatal Deaths Under Dutch Groningen Protocol Very Rare Despite Misinformation Contagion
    EDITORIAL Neonatal deaths under Dutch Groningen Protocol very rare despite misinformation contagion Neil Francis J. Ass. Dying 2016;1(1):7–19 Abstract: The Groningen Protocol specifies criteria for the potential termination of life in severely ill newborns in extremis with untreatable and unrelievable conditions. In September 2006 the Correspondence to: Netherlands formally adopted a Regulation incorporating the Protocol. Despite the Regulation’s Neil Francis development through extensive professional consultation, endorsement by the Dutch Paediatric DyingForChoice.com PO Box 303 Association, empirical data showing a decrease rather than increase in use, and research showing Mont Albert Victoria 3127 that neonatal euthanasia occurs around the world in the absence of regulation, the Dutch Australia Regulation has sparked controversy. More recently it has been claimed that hundreds of babies [email protected] a year are killed under its provisions. Forensic analysis reveals the claim to be comprehensively and evidentially false. Wide online dissemination of the claim by mostly religious sources Author affiliations appear at end demonstrates confirmation bias and misinformation contagion. of article. Key words: Netherlands, Groningen Protocol, neonatal euthanasia, palliative sedation, neuromuscular blocker, non-treatment decision, confirmation bias, misinformation contagion, religion INTRODUCTION Sometimes in these few cases, neuromuscular blockers (NMBs) are administered to relieve gasping.9 The KNMG states that The Royal
    [Show full text]
  • Assisted Suicide & Euthanasia
    Assisted Suicide & Euthanasia | White Paper WorldYouthAlliance By Nadja Wolfe World Youth Alliance Director of Advocacy and Hrvoje Vargić World Youth Alliance Director of Partnerships Reviewed By Nikolas T. Nikas, J.D. and Timothy Devos, M.D., Ph.D. Professor of Medicine, Catholic University Leuven Hematologist, University Hospitals Leuven, Belgium September 2019 World Youth Alliance | 2 I. Introduction Increased life expectancy and ageing populations have made end-of-life care a pressing need, particularly in developed countries, where these trends are strongest. Medical advancements now cure once untreatable diseases, and can prolong life much longer than before for those with illnesses that remain incurable. Yet these advances cannot prevent ageing itelf, or the limitations it causes, such as decreased mobility, loss of sight and hearing, dementia, or pain. The best way to support patients approaching the end of their lives is now a matter of intense debate. The “right to die” movement claims that the answer is to allow medical professionals to hasten death, directly through euthanasia, or indirectly, through physician assisted suicide (PAS). It asserts that there is a right to choose the manner of one’s death, even as part of the right to life, and as a human right. This, proponents insist, is necessary for “death with dignity.” Although many countries still ban the practices, there has been a significant increase in the number of jurisdictions allowing the practices in recent years. This white paper will critically examine the “right to die” and what is required to respect the dignity of each person in end-of-life care in light of law, policy, and practice, with a special concern for the protection of the vulnerable.
    [Show full text]
  • Should Pediatric Euthanasia Be Legalized?
    Marije Brouwer, MA,a, b Christopher Kaczor, PhD, c Margaret P. Battin, MFA, PhD, d ShouldEls Maeckelberghe, PhD, Pediatric a John D. Lantos, MD, e Eduard Euthanasia Verhagen, MD, JD, PhDb be Legalized? abstract Voluntary active euthanasia for adults at their explicit request has been legal in Belgium and the Netherlands since 2002. In those countries, acceptance of the practice for adults has been followed by acceptance of the practice for children. Opponents of euthanasia see this as a dangerous slippery slope. Proponents argue that euthanasia is sometimes ethically appropriate for minors and that, with proper safeguards, it should be legally available in appropriate circumstances for patients at any age. In this Ethics Rounds, we asked philosophers from the United States and the Netherlands, and a Dutch pediatrician, to discuss the ethics of legalizing euthanasia for children. Voluntary active euthanasia for to discuss the ethics of legalizing adults at their explicit request euthanasia for children. aInstitute for Medical Education and bDepartment of Pediatrics, University Medical Center Groningen, University has been legal in Belgium1 and the THE CASE of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands; cDepartment of Netherlands since 2002. Euthanasia, Philosophy, Loyola Marymount University, Los Angeles, voluntary or nonvoluntary, remains California; dDepartment of Philosophy, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah; and eChildren’s Mercy Hospital, Kansas illegal in the United States, although Adults and children of 12 years of City, Missouri several states have legalized age and older can legally request physician-assisted aid in dying for euthanasia in the Netherlands under All authors contributed to the design of this article, the drafting of the manuscript, and the review of adults.
    [Show full text]