When doctors themselves become patients: is euthanasia their choice for the end of life?

Photo: Unsplash

For many people, euthanasia is a way to end their lives in a dignified manner, when there is no longer any prospect of improvement or when they are suffering unbearably due to a serious illness. For doctors, who regularly deal with life and death, this form of ending life is often better known than for people without a medical background. But does that make them look at it differently?

Doctors can also be confronted with serious illnesses. But when it comes to that, do they choose to continue treating as long as possible, or do they prefer euthanasia? This question was put to more than 1,400 doctors.

What turns out? More than half of them would choose euthanasia in such a situation. In addition, almost all the doctors surveyed indicate that they find symptom control more important than artificially prolonging their life. The results of this research have been published in the Journal of Medical Ethics . Scientias also writes about this.

In the international study, doctors from eight different countries were asked about their preferences regarding the end of life, should something serious happen to them. The countries differed greatly in their laws and regulations regarding euthanasia and assisted suicide . The regions studied ranged from Belgium, where euthanasia has been legal since 2002, to the US state of Georgia, where assisted suicide remains strictly prohibited.

The differences between countries seem striking. In Belgium, no less than 81 percent of doctors consider euthanasia a good option for a disease such as cancer, while in Italy only 38 percent share that opinion. The percentages are somewhat lower for Alzheimer's, but the trend remains clear: the more liberal the legislation, the greater the willingness among doctors to consider euthanasia as a possibility .

It is striking that doctors themselves hardly see anything in life-prolonging interventions when they are seriously ill. Most would rather not have treatments such as resuscitation, ventilation or tube feeding. Only half a percent would still want resuscitation in the case of cancer, and only 3.8 percent see something in tube feeding in the case of Alzheimer's.

The researchers call this conflicting feeling a moral tension: doctors often feel obliged to offer all possible treatments , even if they know that it prolongs suffering instead of alleviating it. For themselves, they would rather choose comfort, peace and dignity.

Many doctors feel uncomfortable routinely using life-prolonging treatments, while they would avoid providing the same care for themselves. “Our study shows that doctors everywhere would rather choose quality of life than prolong it at all costs,” the researchers say. The results make one thing clear: doctors want something different for themselves than what is often the norm in medical care.

Not only legislation influences these choices, but religious conviction also plays a role. Doctors without a religion appear to be twice as likely to consider euthanasia or assisted suicide as religious doctors. Palliative doctors, who ensure that patients are put into a deep sleep to alleviate their suffering, are also more reluctant to euthanasia and more often opt for palliative sedation. But general practitioners and doctors in intensive care, for example, are more open to euthanasia.

Science website Scientista writes that the research raises questions: if doctors choose comfort for themselves over prolonging life, why is that not the norm in medical practice? Is the way we treat now really in line with what is truly desirable, or mainly with what we are used to?