Introduction: Deliberations on euthanasia are mostly theoretical, and often lack first-hand perspectives of the affected persons.
Method: Sixty-six patients suffering from cancer in a palliative phase were interviewed about their perspectives of euthanasia in relation to autonomy. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using qualitative content analysis with no predetermined categories.
Results: The informants expressed different positions on euthanasia, ranging from support to opposition, but the majority were undecided due to the complexity of the problem. The informants’ perspectives on euthanasia in relation to autonomy focused on decision making, being affected by (1) power and (2) trust. Legalization of euthanasia was perceived as either (a) increasing patient autonomy by patient empowerment, or (b) decreasing patient autonomy by increasing the medical power of the health care staff, which could be frightening. The informants experienced dependence on others, and expressed various levels of trust in others’ intentions, ranging from full trust to complete mistrust.
Conclusions: Dying cancer patients perceive that they cannot feel completely independent, which affects true autonomous decision making. Further, when considering legalization of euthanasia, the perspectives of patients fearing the effects of legalization should also be taken into account, not only those of patients opting for it.
WalkerRL. Medical ethics needs a new view of autonomy. J Med Philos2008; 33: 594–608.
9.
Public law: Termination of Life on Request and Assisted Suicide Act of April 1st 2002, no 26691, The Netherlands. 2002.
10.
Public law: The Belgian Act on Euthanasia of May 28th, Belgium. 2002.
11.
Public law: Loi du 16 mars 2009 sur l’euthanasie et l’assistance au suicide, Luxembourg. 2009.
12.
ChappleAZieblandSMcPhersonAHerxheimerA. What people close to death say about euthanasia and assisted suicide: a qualitative study. J Med Ethics2006; 32: 706–710.
13.
ChochinovHMWilsonKGEnnsMMowchunNLanderSLevittM. Desire for death in the terminally ill. Am J Psychiatr1995; 152: 1185–1191.
14.
BreitbartWRosenfeldBPessinHKaimMFunesti-EschJGaliettaM. Depression, hopelessness, and desire for hastened death in terminally ill patients with cancer. J Am Med Assoc2000; 284: 2907–2911.
15.
WilsonKGChochinovHMMcPhersonCJSkirkoMGAllardPCharyS. Desire for euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide in palliative cancer care. Health Psychol2007; 26: 314–323.
MaterstvedtLJKaasaS. Euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide in Scandinavia–with a conceptual suggestion regarding international research in relation to the phenomena. Palliat Med2002; 16: 17–32.
18.
GraneheimUHLundmanB. Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Educ Today2004; 24: 105–112.
19.
HsiehHFShannonSE. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res2005; 15(9): 1277.
NVivo qualitative data analysis software (computer program). QSR International Pty Ltd, 2008.
22.
KvaleS. InterViews: an introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1996.
23.
MalterudK. Qualitative research: standards, challenges, and guidelines. Lancet2001; 358: 483–488.
24.
FoucaultM. Power, knowledge: selected interviews and other writings 1972-1977, 1st ed. New York: Pantheon, 1980.
25.
HaveHTWelieJVM. Death and medical power: an ethical analysis of Dutch euthanasia practice. Maidenhead: Open University Press, 2005.
26.
Onwuteaka-PhilipsenBDvan der HeideAKoperDKeij-DeerenbergIRietjensJACRurupML. Euthanasia and other end-of-life decisions in the Netherlands in 1990, 1995, and 2001. Lancet2003; 362: 395–399.
27.
Onwuteaka-PhilipsenBDRurupMLPasmanHRWvan der HeideA. The last phase of life: who requests and who receives euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide?Med Care2010; 48: 596–603.
28.
RietjensJACBilsenJFischerSVan Der HeideAVan Der MaasPJMiccinessiG. Using drugs to end life without an explicit request of the patient. Death Stud2007; 31: 205–221.
29.
LevinsonWKaoAKubyAThistedRA. Not all patients want to participate in decision making. A national study of public preferences. J Gen Intern Med2005; 20: 531–535.
30.
ElkinEBKimSHMCasperESKissaneDWSchragD. Desire for information and involvement in treatment decisions: elderly cancer patients’ preferences and their physicians’ perceptions. J Clin Oncol2007; 25: 5275–5280.
31.
EkdahlAWAnderssonLFriedrichsenM. ‘They do what they think is the best for me.’ Frail elderly patients’ preferences for participation in their care during hospitalization. Patient Educ Couns2010; 80: 233–240.
32.
FraenkelLMcGrawS. Participation in medical decision making: the patients’ perspective. Med Decis Making2007; 27: 533–538.
33.
DroughtTSKoenigBA. ‘Choice’ in end-of-life decision making: researching fact or fiction?Gerontologist2002; 42: 114–128.
34.
CallahanD. A commentary-putting autonomy in its place: developing effective guidelines. Gerontologist2002; 42: 129–131.
35.
YalomID. Existential psychotherapy. New York: Basic Books, 1980.
36.
McPhersonCJWilsonKGMurrayMA. Feeling like a burden to others: a systematic review focusing on the end of life. Palliat Med2007; 21: 115.
37.
WoodsS. Respect for persons, autonomy and palliative care. Med Health Care Philos2005; 8: 243–253.
McKinstryBAshcroftRECarJFreemanGKSheikhA. Interventions for improving patients’ trust in doctors and groups of doctors. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2006; 3: CD004134.
40.
IllingworthP. Trust: the scarcest of medical resources. J Med Philos2002; 27: 31–46.
41.
HardinR. The street-level epistemology of trust. Polit Soc1993; 21: 505.
42.
KellyBJBurnettPCPelusiDBadgerSJVargheseFTRobertsonMM. Association between clinician factors and a patient’s wish to hasten death: terminally ill cancer patients and their doctors. Psychosomatics2004; 45: 311–318.
43.
KellyBBurnettPBadgerSPelusiDVargheseFTRobertsonM. Doctors and their patients: a context for understanding the wish to hasten death. Psychooncology2003; 12: 375–384.
44.
TheAMHakTKoëterGvan Der WalG. Collusion in doctor-patient communication about imminent death: an ethnographic study. Br Med J2000; 321: 1376–1381.
