Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T21:31:26.414Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Euthanasia and assisted suicide (EAS) in psychiatric patients

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 July 2023

P. Pedro Felgueiras*
Affiliation:
Psychiatry department, Vila Nova de Gaia Hospital Center, Vila Nova de Gaia, Portugal
R. Silva
Affiliation:
Psychiatry department, Vila Nova de Gaia Hospital Center, Vila Nova de Gaia, Portugal
*
*Corresponding author.

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Introduction

A legal definition for EAS describes this procedure as “intentionally terminating life by someone other than the person concerned, at the latter’s request”. The number of requests for EAS has been progressively increasing in countries where this procedure is allowed, including concerning psychiatric patients (2% of all requests). EAS for reasons of unbearable suffering raises ethical concerns due to lack of criteria for psychiatric patients.

Objectives

To discuss the avaliable data about EAS and its controversial value in psychiatric patients.

Methods

Non-systematic review of literature on current knowledge about EAS, particularly in patients with mental disorder.

Results

In terms of sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, these patients were mostly women, with at least two psychiatric conditions; the main diagnosis is a (treatment-resistant) mood disorder, with some medical comorbidity. Psychological suffering was the main motivation, in patients with severe symptomatology associated with psychiatric and physical conditions (26% reported both psychological and physical suffering). These patients tend to be empowered and value self-determination. There is to highlight a high percentage of patients still alive after a not granted pEAS request (69%) and a high rate of pEAS requests withdrawals (37%).

Conclusions

Suicide prevention remains a priority in terms of public health. Thus, there is a need to ensure that EAS isn`t a way to increase suicide mortality by giving access to lethal methods to suicidal patients. In some cases, EAS request has a paradoxical value to regain control of life and it`s related to the transient nature of unbearable mental suffering.

The actual process provides a continued recovery-oriented care in parallel with the EAS evaluation, and a thorough evaluation which requires a multi-expert panel with the envolvement of mental health professionals. Ethical concerns remains about its paradox: unbearable psychological suffering is a target for suicide prevention and also a required criterion for EAS.

Disclosure of Interest

None Declared

Type
Abstract
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the European Psychiatric Association
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.