TORONTO, September 17, 2002 (LSN.ca) – The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition supports the recently released study on end of life titled: Consensus guidelines on analgesia and sedation in dying intensive care unit patients. The study guidelines, developed by the University of Toronto Joint Centre for Bioethics, do not blur the differences between euthanasia and the proper application of palliative care and are not a step closer toward the acceptance of euthanasia. Euthanasia Prevention Coalition Vice President and Palliative Care nursing consultant Jean Echlin commented, “The guidelines are important because they encourage medical professionals to aggressively treat pain and manage symptoms for dying patients and they do not encourage euthanasia.”“These guidelines correctly define the difference between euthanasia and the ethical use of palliative care” stated Alex Schadenberg, executive director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition. “A physician may accidentally overdose a patient with analgesics while seeking to control pain, but this is clearly different than intentionally killing someone.”“This ‘double effect’ happens in many medical circumstances,” noted Schadenberg. “Physicians intend to improve the health of patients and yet sometimes patients die unintentionally. The physician has not committed homicide when a patient dies from the unintended effects of properly applied treatments.”
The guidelines emphasize the need for physicians to properly chart the administering of narcotics/sedatives. “This is an important recommendation because it protects ethical physicians when unintended effects occur and it protects patients and their families from the acts of unethical physicians. When an unethical physician intentionally kills a patient, the information on the chart or the lack of charting can confirm or at least create a strong suspicion concerning the intention of the physician,” said Schadenberg. View the full Consensus guidelines: https://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6939/3/3