What is it about?

The aim of this article is to use data from Belgium to analyse distinctions between palliative sedation and euthanasia. There is a need to reduce confusion and improve communication related to patient management at the end of life specifically regarding the rapidly expanding area of patient care that incorporates a spectrum of nuanced yet overlapping terms such as palliative care, sedation, palliative sedation, continued sedation, continued sedation until death, terminal sedation, voluntary euthanasia and involuntary euthanasia. Some physicians and nurses mistakenly think that relieving suffering at the end of life by heavily sedating patients is a form of euthanasia, when indeed it is merely responding to the ordinary and proportionate needs of the patient. Concerns are raised about abuse in the form of deliberate involuntary euthanasia, obfuscation and disregard for the processes sustaining the management of refractory suffering at the end of life. Some suggestions designed to improve patient management and prevent potential abuse are offered.

Featured Image

Why is it important?

I believe in phenomenology. Languages constructs and deconstructs reality. Medical professionals should be careful in the langue they use.

Perspectives

One of these cases when I researched one thing and discovered another. I wanted to examine palliative sedation in Belgium and discovered a language conundrum.

Professor Raphael Cohen-Almagor
Hebrew University of Jerusalem

Read the Original

This page is a summary of: Euthanasia and palliative sedation in Belgium, BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care, January 2018, BMJ,
DOI: 10.1136/bmjspcare-2017-001398.
You can read the full text:

Read

Contributors

The following have contributed to this page