Cuttini M, Casotto V, Kaminski M, de Beaufort I, Berbik I, Hansen G, Kollée L, Kucinskas A, Lenoir S, Levin A, Orzalesi M, Persson J, Rebagliato M, Reid M, Saracci R
Unit of Epidemiology, Burlo Garofolo Institute, Trieste and Tuscany Agency for Health, Florence, Italy.
Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2004 Jan;89(1):F19-24. doi: 10.1136/fn.89.1.f19.
To present the views of a representative sample of neonatal doctors and nurses in 10 European countries on the moral acceptability of active euthanasia and its legal regulation.
A total of 142 neonatal intensive care units were recruited by census (in the Netherlands, Sweden, Hungary, and the Baltic countries) or random sampling (in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom); 1391 doctors and 3410 nurses completed an anonymous questionnaire (response rates 89% and 86% respectively).
The staff opinion that the law in their country should be changed to allow active euthanasia "more than now".
Active euthanasia appeared to be both acceptable and practiced in the Netherlands, France, and to a lesser extent Lithuania, and less acceptable in Sweden, Hungary, Italy, and Spain. More then half (53%) of the doctors in the Netherlands, but only a quarter (24%) in France felt that the law should be changed to allow active euthanasia "more than now". For 40% of French doctors, end of life issues should not be regulated by law. Being male, regular involvement in research, less than six years professional experience, and having ever participated in a decision of active euthanasia were positively associated with an opinion favouring relaxation of legal constraints. Having had children, religiousness, and believing in the absolute value of human life showed a negative association. Nurses were slightly more likely to consider active euthanasia acceptable in selected circumstances, and to feel that the law should be changed to allow it more than now.
Opinions of health professionals vary widely between countries, and, even where neonatal euthanasia is already practiced, do not uniformly support its legalisation.
呈现10个欧洲国家新生儿科医生和护士的代表性样本对主动安乐死的道德可接受性及其法律规制的看法。
通过普查(在荷兰、瑞典、匈牙利和波罗的海国家)或随机抽样(在法国、德国、意大利、西班牙和英国)招募了总共142个新生儿重症监护病房;1391名医生和3410名护士完成了一份匿名问卷(回复率分别为89%和86%)。
工作人员认为本国法律应做出改变以允许“比现在更多地”实施主动安乐死的观点。
主动安乐死在荷兰、法国似乎是可接受且有实施的,在立陶宛程度稍低,而在瑞典、匈牙利、意大利和西班牙较不可接受。荷兰超过一半(53%)的医生认为法律应做出改变以允许“比现在更多地”实施主动安乐死,但法国只有四分之一(24%)的医生这样认为。对于40%的法国医生而言,生命末期问题不应受法律规制。男性、经常参与研究、专业经验少于6年以及曾参与主动安乐死决策与支持放宽法律限制的观点呈正相关。有孩子、笃信宗教以及相信人类生命的绝对价值呈负相关。护士在某些特定情况下稍微更倾向于认为主动安乐死是可接受的,并且觉得法律应做出改变以允许比现在更多地实施主动安乐死。
不同国家的卫生专业人员观点差异很大,而且即使在已经实施新生儿安乐死的地方,也并非一致支持将其合法化。