Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Active euthanasia in The Netherlands.

M A de Wachter1

  • 1Institute for Bioethics, Maastricht, The Netherlands.

JAMA
|December 15, 1989
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

How useful is Leuven personalism in the world of bioethics? The test case of artificial insemination.

European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology·1999
Same author

The European convention on bioethics.

The Hastings Center report·1997
Same author

[Not Available].

KOS·1997
Same author

Euthanasia in The Netherlands.

The Hastings Center report·1992
Same author

The Dutch & the dying.

The Hastings Center report·1991
Same author

Interdisciplinary bioethics: but where do we start? A reflection of epochè as method.

The Journal of medicine and philosophy·1982
Same journal

Alcohol-Related Liver Disease: A Review.

JAMA·2026
Same journal

Online Prescribing of GLP-1 Receptor Agonists.

JAMA·2026
Same journal

Using AI Disagreement to Expose Gaps in Coverage Rules.

JAMA·2026
Same journal

Randomized Trials in Pregnancy.

JAMA·2026
Same journal

Randomized Trials in Pregnancy-Reply.

JAMA·2026
Same journal

WHO Issues Guidelines for Treating Ebola and Marburg Viruses.

JAMA·2026
See all related articles

Active euthanasia in the Netherlands is debated, with unclear practices and no incidence data. Despite legal challenges, jurisprudence allows it under strict conditions, prompting calls for law reform.

Area of Science:

  • Medical Ethics
  • Public Health Policy
  • Legal Medicine

Background:

  • Active euthanasia in the Netherlands is a subject of ongoing professional and public discussion.
  • Key aspects of its medical practice and actual incidence remain largely unquantified.
  • Legally, active euthanasia is a criminal offense, yet a body of jurisprudence since 1973 permits it under specific strict conditions.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To explore the complexities surrounding active euthanasia in the Netherlands.
  • To highlight the lack of clear data on the incidence of active euthanasia.
  • To examine the legal framework and evolving jurisprudence related to physician-assisted death.

Main Methods:

  • Review of legal precedents and jurisprudence concerning active euthanasia.
Keywords:
Death and EuthanasiaLegal ApproachNetherlands State Commission on EuthanasiaRoyal Dutch Medical Association

Related Experiment Videos

  • Analysis of proposals for legislative change from the Royal Dutch Medical Association and a state commission.
  • Examination of institutional policies and procedures developed to manage active euthanasia.
  • Main Results:

    • Despite legal prohibitions, a consistent pattern of jurisprudence has evolved since 1973, enabling physicians to practice active euthanasia under strict conditions.
    • Two significant proposals advocate for changes to the current law.
    • Various Dutch institutions have established frameworks for acceptable and controllable participation in active euthanasia.
    • A notable segment of Dutch physicians expresses discomfort with the societal acceptance of this practice.

    Conclusions:

    • The legal and medical landscape of active euthanasia in the Netherlands is complex and evolving.
    • There is a clear tension between the legal status and the practical application of active euthanasia.
    • Further legislative and professional consensus-building is indicated, despite institutional efforts and physician reservations.