Abstract
The present situation in the Netherlands leads to the following three conclusions: (1) in daily health care practices, the crucial distinction between voluntary and nonvoluntary termination of life is losing meaning; (2) contrary to previous decades, society tends to accept cases of nonvoluntary termination of life more easily. The Remmelink Committee does not consider these cases morally troublesome. Indeed, the new legislative proposals simply include nonvoluntary termination of life in the same disclosure regulation that governs voluntary termination of life; and (3) although the Dutch debate on euthanasia began as a protest against contemporary medicine's power over death and dying, the general acceptance of euthanasia and the recent legislation may increase medical power by shifting the balance further in the direction of physicians. Euthanasia is, after all, the ultimate step in medical interventionism; suffering is to be relieved by any means, even if it entails the elimination of the sufferer.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 97-108 |
| Number of pages | 12 |
| Journal | Critical Care Clinics |
| Volume | 12 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - 1996 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Fingerprint
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine
Cite this
Euthanasia in the Netherlands. / Ten Have, H. A M J; Welie, Jos V. M.
In: Critical Care Clinics, Vol. 12, No. 1, 1996, p. 97-108.Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Euthanasia in the Netherlands
AU - Ten Have, H. A M J
AU - Welie, Jos V. M.
PY - 1996
Y1 - 1996
N2 - The present situation in the Netherlands leads to the following three conclusions: (1) in daily health care practices, the crucial distinction between voluntary and nonvoluntary termination of life is losing meaning; (2) contrary to previous decades, society tends to accept cases of nonvoluntary termination of life more easily. The Remmelink Committee does not consider these cases morally troublesome. Indeed, the new legislative proposals simply include nonvoluntary termination of life in the same disclosure regulation that governs voluntary termination of life; and (3) although the Dutch debate on euthanasia began as a protest against contemporary medicine's power over death and dying, the general acceptance of euthanasia and the recent legislation may increase medical power by shifting the balance further in the direction of physicians. Euthanasia is, after all, the ultimate step in medical interventionism; suffering is to be relieved by any means, even if it entails the elimination of the sufferer.
AB - The present situation in the Netherlands leads to the following three conclusions: (1) in daily health care practices, the crucial distinction between voluntary and nonvoluntary termination of life is losing meaning; (2) contrary to previous decades, society tends to accept cases of nonvoluntary termination of life more easily. The Remmelink Committee does not consider these cases morally troublesome. Indeed, the new legislative proposals simply include nonvoluntary termination of life in the same disclosure regulation that governs voluntary termination of life; and (3) although the Dutch debate on euthanasia began as a protest against contemporary medicine's power over death and dying, the general acceptance of euthanasia and the recent legislation may increase medical power by shifting the balance further in the direction of physicians. Euthanasia is, after all, the ultimate step in medical interventionism; suffering is to be relieved by any means, even if it entails the elimination of the sufferer.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0030026916&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0030026916&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/S0749-0704(05)70217-7
DO - 10.1016/S0749-0704(05)70217-7
M3 - Review article
VL - 12
SP - 97
EP - 108
JO - Critical Care Clinics
JF - Critical Care Clinics
SN - 0749-0704
IS - 1
ER -