Show simple item record

dc.creatorFolker, Anna P.en
dc.creatorHoltug, Nilsen
dc.creatorJensen, Annette B.en
dc.creatorKappel, Klemensen
dc.creatorNielsen, Jesper K.en
dc.creatorNorup, Michaelen
dc.date.accessioned2015-05-05T18:57:45Zen
dc.date.available2015-05-05T18:57:45Zen
dc.date.created1996-07en
dc.date.issued1996-07en
dc.identifier10.1111/biot.1996.10.issue-3en
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationBioethics. 1996 Jul; 10(3): 233-249.en
dc.identifier.issn0269-9702en
dc.identifier.urihttp://worldcatlibraries.org/registry/gateway?version=1.0&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&atitle=Experiences+and+Attitudes+towards+End-of-Life+Decisions+Amongst+danish+Physicians&title=Bioethics.++&volume=10&issue=3&pages=233-249&date=1996&au=Folker,+Anna+P.en
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1111/biot.1996.10.issue-3en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10822/749662en
dc.description.abstractIn this survey we have investigated the experiences and attitudes of Danish physicians regarding end-of-life decisions. Most respondents have made decisions that involve hastening the death of a patient, and almost all find it acceptable to do so. Such decisions are made more often, and considered ethically more acceptable, with the informed consent of the patient than without. But both non-resuscitation decisions, and decisions to provide pain relief in doses that will shorten the patient's life, have been made and found acceptable by at least 50% of the respondents, even when there is no informed consent. Furthermore, 12% have doubled morphine dosages with fixed intervals, thus providing doses substantially higher than that necessary to control pain, without the informed consent of the patient. Two percent have helped in assisted suicide, and 5% have administered a lethal injection at the patient's request. Respectively 37% and 34% find these last two practices ethically acceptable. Amongst those that do not find them acceptable, the most important reasons to be opposed are, the doctrine of double effect, the doctrine of doing and allowing, and the view that human life is sacred. Amongst supporters, the most important reasons mentioned are, that the patient's right to self-determination should be respected, the view that a patient should not be forced to suffer, and the view that the patient has a right to be helped to a dignified death.en
dc.formatArticleen
dc.languageenen
dc.sourceBRL:KIE/52328en
dc.subjectAssisted Suicideen
dc.subjectAttitudesen
dc.subjectConsenten
dc.subjectDeathen
dc.subjectDouble Effecten
dc.subjectDrugsen
dc.subjectEuthanasiaen
dc.subjectInformed Consenten
dc.subjectIntentionen
dc.subjectKnowledgeen
dc.subjectLifeen
dc.subjectMotivationen
dc.subjectOpioid Analgesicsen
dc.subjectPainen
dc.subjectPalliative Careen
dc.subjectPhysiciansen
dc.subjectResuscitationen
dc.subjectResuscitation Ordersen
dc.subjectRight to Dieen
dc.subjectSuicideen
dc.subjectSurveyen
dc.subjectTerminal Careen
dc.subjectTerminally Illen
dc.subjectVoluntary Euthanasiaen
dc.titleExperiences and Attitudes Towards End-of-Life Decisions Amongst Danish Physiciansen
dc.provenanceDigital citation created by the National Reference Center for Bioethics Literature at Georgetown University for the BIOETHICSLINE database, part of the Kennedy Institute of Ethics' Bioethics Information Retrieval Project funded by the United States National Library of Medicine.en
dc.provenanceDigital citation migrated from OpenText LiveLink Discovery Server database named NBIO hosted by the Bioethics Research Library to the DSpace collection BioethicsLine hosted by Georgetown University.en


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


Georgetown University Seal
©2009—2019 Bioethics Research Library
Box 571212 Washington DC 20057-1212
202.687.3885