Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2pzkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-27T09:03:41.013Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Egg Cell Preservation and the Right to Die in The Netherlands: Citizens’ Choices and the Limits of Medicine

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 May 2011

DOROTHEA P. TOUWEN
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

It is a funny thing with the Dutch. On one hand, they seem preoccupied with death and adamant that patients be allowed to decide for themselves in what way they want to die. On the other, contrary to popular belief, the Dutch physician is allotted a very influential role in treatment decisions, far more prominent than in many other Western countries. From an American perspective Dutch professional ethics may seem quite paternalistic: a patient’s freedom to decide to have a particular medical treatment is limited by the physician’s professional assessment of the medical need of this treatment. The question arises: What is the relationship between the professional responsibility of Dutch physicians and the right of Dutch patients to decide for themselves? This question is illustrated by the ongoing national debate in The Netherlands on euthanasia and the growing demand for a further reaching right to self-determination concerning ending one’s life. However, contrary to popular belief, not all Dutch ethical debate concerns end-of-life questions.

Type
Special Section: Bioethics beyond Borders 2011
Information
Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics , Volume 20 , Issue 3 , July 2011 , pp. 449 - 457
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Helton, M, van der Steen, J, Daaleman, TP, Gamble, GR, Ribbe, MW. A cross–cultural study of physician treatment decisions for demented nursing home patients who develop pneumonia. Annals of Family Medicine 2006;4(3):221–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

2. Kamer verwerpt plan AMC invriezen eicellen [Parliament rejects plan of Amsterdam Medical Centre to deep freeze egg cells]. NRC Handelsblad 2009 Jul 16 [in Dutch].

3. NVOG/KLEM. Vitrificatie van Humane Eicellen en Embryo’s [Vitrification of Human Oocytes and Embryos]. Den Haag: NVOG/KLEM; 2010.

4. Schellart, M. Ei voor Later [Egg for Later]. [Documentary]. 2010 [in Dutch].Google Scholar

5. Dondorp, WJ, de Wert, GMWR. Fertility preservation for healthy women: Ethical aspects. Human Reproduction 2009;24(8):1779–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

6. See note 5, Dondorp, de Wert 2009:1781.

7. See note 3, NVOG/KLEM 2010:12.

8. National Public Health Compass 2010; available at http:// www.nationaalkompas.nl (last accessed 26 Dec 2010).

9. Fact sheet Financial Independence October 2010; available at http://www.e-quality.nl/assets/e-quality/publicaties/2010/Factsheets/FactsheetFinancieleZelfredzaamheid.pdf (last accessed 25 Feb 2011). Only 46% of all women in the age that they could work are economically independent. De Hoog, S, van Egten, C, de Jong, T. Vrouwen en Financiële Zelfredzaamheid. Een Onderzoek naar de Kenmerken van Financieel Kwetsbare Vrouwen. [Women and the Ability to Cope Financially. A Study of the Characteristics of Financially Fragile Women]. Den Haag: E-Quality; 2010 [in Dutch].Google Scholar

10. Council for Public Health and Health Care (RVZ). Uitstel van Ouderschap. Medisch of Maatschappelijk Problem? [Postponement of parenthood: Medical or societal problem?]. The Hague: RVZ; 2007 [in Dutch].

11. The vitrification technique was learned in Japan by physicians of the Amsterdam Medical Centre and announced as a possible technique for women with a nonmedical reason to want their egg cells preserved. The public and political outcry against it made them withdraw the offer (NRC Handelsblad 2009 Jul 16).

12. Uit vrije wil [By your own free choice]; available at http:// www.uitvrijewil.nu (last accessed 3 Dec 2010) [in Dutch].

13. See note 12.

14. Rietjens, JAC, van der Maas, PJ, Onwuteaka-Philipsen, BD, van Delden, JJM, van der Heide, A. Two decades of research on euthanasia from the Netherlands. What have we learnt and what questions remain? Bioethical Inquiry 2009;6:271–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

15. Engberts, DP, Kalkman-Bogerd, LE. Gezondheidsrecht [Health Law]. Houten: Bohn Stafleu van Loghum; 2009 [in Dutch].CrossRefGoogle Scholar

16. Hilhorst, M. Er Dokter bij Blijven. Medisch-ethisch Handelen in Veranderende Omstandigheden. [To Keep Being a Doctor. Medical-Ethical Actions in Changing Circumstances]. Assen: Van Gorcum; 1999 [in Dutch].Google Scholar

17. Touwen, DP. Voor een Ander. Beslissingsverantwoordelijkheden in de Verpleeghuisgeneeskunde. [For Someone Else. Decisional Responsibilities in Nursing Home Medicine]. Amsterdam: Aksant; 2008 [in Dutch].Google Scholar

18. Bovenberg, J. Dodelijk Dilemma. [HollandDoc: Deathly Dilemma]. [Documentary] 2009 [in Dutch].Google Scholar

19. See note 14, Rietjens et al. 2009.

20. Hurst, SA, Mauron, A. Assisted suicide and euthanasia in Switzerland: Allowing a role for non-physicians. British Medical Journal 2003;326:271.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

21. The BAM. Verlossers naast God. Dokters en Euthanasie in Nederland [Saviors Next to God. Physicians and Euthanasia in the Netherlands]. Amsterdam: Thoeris; 2009 [in Dutch].Google Scholar

22. It is important to note, however, that this self-determination needs the help of somebody else, namely, the physician. It may be more correct therefore to talk about assisted self-determination.

23. Engberts, DP. The struggle for the guiding principle in health care ethics and health law. In: In ’t Groen, A, de Jong, HJ, Klasen, E, Papma, H, van Slooten, P, eds. Knowledge in Ferment. Dilemmas in Science, Scholarship and Society. Leiden: Leiden University Press; 2007:85–103.Google Scholar