Skip to main content

Table 2 Engagement of psychiatrists in euthanasia, throughout their career

From: The engagement of psychiatrists in the assessment of euthanasia requests from psychiatric patients in Belgium: a survey study

Confronted with euthanasia throughout their career Sample (N = 178) N/%
Ever confronted with such requests 143 (80.3)
- Ever confronted and never refused to be involved 130 (73.0)
- Ever confronted, but ever refused to be involved 13 (7.3)
Ever engaged in assessment for euthanasia in APC patientsa
 No, never 48 (27.5)
 Yes, as 130 (72.5)b
- referring physician 78 (43.8)
- attending physician 54 (30.3)
   with patients from my practice 41 (23.0)
   for patients referred to me by a colleague 27 (15.2)
- preliminary advising physician 35 (19.7)
- formally advising physician 39 (21.9)
- participant to the administration of the lethal drugs (performing physician) 8 (4.5)
   with patients from my practice 8 (4.5)
   for patients referred to me by a colleague 0 (0.0)
  - in another rolec 12 (6.8)
  1. a56 psychiatrists (43.4%) indicated that they have been actively engaged in more than one role, other than the role of referring physician. Seventy-one psychiatrists (55% of all 129 psychiatrists ever engaged in such euthanasia procedures) indicated that they have not been engaged in more than one role, throughout their career (46 psychiatrists as referring physician, 13 as attending physician, 7 as formally advising and 5 as preliminary advising physician)
  2. b One of the 130 cases was not yet involved
  3. c12 psychiatrists indicated being involved in another role, most of them were passively involved as the treating physician of the patient’s psychopathology (e.g. discussing the euthanasia request during or after the euthanasia procedure, as well as during crisis confinement), as a member of the psychiatric care facility’s ethics committee or as trainee in psychiatry