1
|
De Hert M, Van Assche K. Euthanasia for unbearable suffering caused by a psychiatric disorder: improving the regulatory framework. World Psychiatry 2024; 23:54-56. [PMID: 38214642 PMCID: PMC10785970 DOI: 10.1002/wps.21152] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/13/2024] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Marc De Hert
- University Psychiatric Centre, KU Leuven, Kortenberg, Belgium
- Department of Neurosciences, Centre for Clinical Psychiatry, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
- Leuven Brain Institute, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
- Antwerp Health Law and Ethics Chair, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Kristof Van Assche
- Antwerp Health Law and Ethics Chair, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
- Research Group Personal Rights and Property Rights, Faculty of Law, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Muller E, Muller WJ, Assche KV, Fraga ML, Martin D. 117.6: The legislative landscape for organ donation and organ trafficking in Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs) in Africa. Transplantation 2023; 107:11. [PMID: 37845860 DOI: 10.1097/01.tp.0000993020.47228.39] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/18/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Elmi Muller
- Surgery, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Courtney AE, Moorlock G, Van Assche K, Burnapp L, Mamode N, Lennerling A, Dor FJMF. Living Donor Kidney Transplantation in Older Individuals: An Ethical Legal and Psychological Aspects of Transplantation (ELPAT) View. Transpl Int 2023; 36:11139. [PMID: 37152615 PMCID: PMC10161899 DOI: 10.3389/ti.2023.11139] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/15/2022] [Accepted: 04/12/2023] [Indexed: 05/09/2023]
Abstract
Living donor transplantation is the optimal treatment for suitable patients with end-stage kidney disease. There are particular advantages for older individuals in terms of elective surgery, timely transplantation, and early graft function. Yet, despite the superiority of living donor transplantation especially for this cohort, older patients are significantly less likely to access this treatment modality than younger age groups. However, given the changing population demographic in recent decades, there are increasing numbers of older but otherwise healthy individuals with kidney disease who could benefit from living donor transplantation. The complex reasons for this inequity of access are explored, including conscious and unconscious age-related bias by healthcare professionals, concerns relating to older living donors, ethical anxieties related to younger adults donating to aging patients, unwillingness of potential older recipients to consider living donation, and the relevant legislation. There is a legal and moral duty to consider the inequity of access to living donor transplantation, recognising both the potential disparity between chronological and physiological age in older patients, and benefits of this treatment for individuals as well as society.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aisling E. Courtney
- Regional Nephrology and Transplant Unit, Belfast City Hospital, Belfast, United Kingdom
- *Correspondence: Aisling E. Courtney,
| | - Greg Moorlock
- Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
| | - Kristof Van Assche
- Research Group Personal Rights and Property Rights, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Lisa Burnapp
- NHS Blood and Transplant, Bristol, United Kingdom
| | - Nizam Mamode
- Department of Surgery, King’s College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Annette Lennerling
- The Transplant Centre, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden
- Institute of Health and Care Sciences, The Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Frank J. M. F. Dor
- Imperial College Renal and Transplant Centre, Hammersmith Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
De Hert M, Loos S, Van Assche K. The Belgian euthanasia law under scrutiny of the highest courts. Lancet Reg Health Eur 2022; 24:100549. [PMID: 36643662 PMCID: PMC9832267 DOI: 10.1016/j.lanepe.2022.100549] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/05/2022] [Accepted: 11/07/2022] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Marc De Hert
- University Psychiatric Centre Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Kortenberg, Belgium,Department of Neurosciences, Centre for Clinical Psychiatry, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium,Leuven Brain Institute, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium,Antwerp Health Law and Ethics Chair, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium,Corresponding author. Campus Kortenberg, Leuvensesteenweg 517, 3070 Kortenberg, Belgium.
| | - Sien Loos
- Research Group Personal Rights and Property Rights, Faculty of Law, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium,Leuven Institute for Healthcare Policy, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Kristof Van Assche
- Antwerp Health Law and Ethics Chair, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium,Research Group Personal Rights and Property Rights, Faculty of Law, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Molina-Pérez A, Werner-Felmayer G, Van Assche K, Jensen AMB, Delgado J, Flatscher-Thöni M, Hannikainen IR, Rodriguez-Arias D, Schicktanz S, Wöhlke S. Attitudes of European students towards family decision-making and the harmonisation of consent systems in deceased organ donation: a cross-national survey. BMC Public Health 2022; 22:2080. [PMCID: PMC9664433 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-022-14476-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/28/2022] [Accepted: 10/27/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Abstract
Background
European countries are increasingly harmonising their organ donation and transplantation policies. Although a growing number of nations are moving to presumed consent to deceased organ donation, no attempts have been made to harmonise policies on individual consent and the role of the family in the decision-making process. Little is known about public awareness of and attitudes towards the role of the family in their own country and European harmonisation on these health policy dimensions. To improve understanding of these issues, we examined what university students think about the role of the family in decision-making in deceased organ donation and about harmonising consent policies within Europe.
Methods
Using LimeSurvey© software, we conducted a comparative cross-sectional international survey of 2193 university students of health sciences and humanities/social sciences from Austria (339), Belgium (439), Denmark (230), Germany (424), Greece (159), Romania (190), Slovenia (190), and Spain (222).
Results
Participants from opt-in countries may have a better awareness of the family’s legal role than those from opt-out countries. Most respondents opposed the family veto, but they were more ambivalent towards the role of the family as a surrogate decision-maker. The majority of participants were satisfied with the family’s legal role. However, those who were unsatisfied preferred to limit family involvement. Overall, participants were opposed to the idea of national sovereignty over consent policies. They favoured an opt-out policy harmonisation and were divided over opt-in. Their views on harmonisation of family involvement were consistent with their personal preferences.
Conclusions
There is overall division on whether families should have a surrogate role, and substantial opposition to granting them sole authority over decision-making. If European countries were to harmonise their policies on consent for organ donation, an opt-out system that grants families a surrogate decision-making role may enjoy the widest public support.
Collapse
|
6
|
Van Assche K, Greenwood R, Gruezmacher M. The local paradox in grand policy schemes. Lessons from Newfoundland and Labrador. Scandinavian Journal of Management 2022. [DOI: 10.1016/j.scaman.2022.101212] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
|
7
|
Mamode N, Van Assche K, Burnapp L, Courtney A, van Dellen D, Houthoff M, Maple H, Moorlock G, Dor FJMF, Lennerling A. Donor Autonomy and Self-Sacrifice in Living Organ Donation: An Ethical Legal and Psychological Aspects of Transplantation (ELPAT) View. Transpl Int 2022; 35:10131. [PMID: 35387400 PMCID: PMC8979023 DOI: 10.3389/ti.2022.10131] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/21/2021] [Accepted: 02/02/2022] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
Clinical teams understandably wish to minimise risks to living kidney donors undergoing surgery, but are often faced with uncertainty about the extent of risk, or donors who wish to proceed despite those risks. Here we explore how these difficult decisions may be approached and consider the conflicts between autonomy and paternalism, the place of self-sacrifice and consideration of risks and benefits. Donor autonomy should be considered as in the context of the depth and strength of feeling, understanding risk and competing influences. Discussion of risks could be improved by using absolute risk, supra-regional MDMs and including the risks to the clinical team as well as the donor. The psychological effects on the donor of poor outcomes for the untransplanted recipient should also be taken into account. There is a lack of detailed data on the risks to the donor who has significant co-morbidities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nizam Mamode
- Department of Transplantation, Guys and St Thomas NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
- *Correspondence: Nizam Mamode,
| | - Kristof Van Assche
- Research Group Personal Rights and Property Rights, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Lisa Burnapp
- Department of Transplantation, Guys and St Thomas NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Aisling Courtney
- Regional Nephrology and Transplant Unit, Belfast City Hospital, Belfast, United Kingdom
| | - David van Dellen
- Department of Renal and Pancreas Transplantation, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Mireille Houthoff
- Erasmus MC Transplant Institute, Department of Internal Medicine, University Medical Centre, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Hannah Maple
- Department of Transplantation, Guys and St Thomas NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Greg Moorlock
- Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
| | - Frank J. M. F. Dor
- Imperial College Renal and Transplant Centre, Hammersmith Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom
| | - Annette Lennerling
- The Transplant Centre, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden
- Institute of Health and Care Sciences, The Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
De Hert M, Mazereel V, Stroobants M, De Picker L, Van Assche K, Detraux J. COVID-19-Related Mortality Risk in People With Severe Mental Illness: A Systematic and Critical Review. Front Psychiatry 2022; 12:798554. [PMID: 35095612 PMCID: PMC8793909 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2021.798554] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/20/2021] [Accepted: 12/03/2021] [Indexed: 01/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Background: Increasing clinical evidence suggests that people with severe mental illness (SMI), including schizophrenia spectrum disorders, bipolar disorder (BD), and major depressive disorder (MDD), are at higher risk of dying from COVID-19. Several systematic reviews examining the association between psychiatric disorders and COVID-19-related mortality have recently been published. Although these reviews have been conducted thoroughly, certain methodological limitations may hinder the accuracy of their research findings. Methods: A systematic literature search, using the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus databases (from inception to July 23, 2021), was conducted for observational studies assessing the risk of death associated with COVID-19 infection in adult patients with pre-existing schizophrenia spectrum disorders, BD, or MDD. Methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Results: Of 1,446 records screened, 13 articles investigating the rates of death in patients with pre-existing SMI were included in this systematic review. Quality assessment scores of the included studies ranged from moderate to high. Most results seem to indicate that patients with SMI, particularly patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders, are at significantly higher risk of COVID-19-related mortality, as compared to patients without SMI. However, the extent of the variation in COVID-19-related mortality rates between studies including people with schizophrenia spectrum disorders was large because of a low level of precision of the estimated mortality outcome(s) in certain studies. Most studies on MDD and BD did not include specific information on the mood state or disease severity of patients. Due to a lack of data, it remains unknown to what extent patients with BD are at increased risk of COVID-19-related mortality. A variety of factors are likely to contribute to the increased mortality risk of COVID-19 in these patients. These include male sex, older age, somatic comorbidities (particularly cardiovascular diseases), as well as disease-specific characteristics. Conclusion: Methodological limitations hamper the accuracy of COVID-19-related mortality estimates for the main categories of SMIs. Nevertheless, evidence suggests that SMI is associated with excess COVID-19 mortality. Policy makers therefore must consider these vulnerable individuals as a high-risk group that should be given particular attention. This means that targeted interventions to maximize vaccination uptake among these patients are required to address the higher burden of COVID-19 infection in this already disadvantaged group.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marc De Hert
- Department of Neurosciences, Center for Clinical Psychiatry, University Psychiatric Center, KU Leuven, Kortenberg, Belgium
- Antwerp Health Law and Ethics Chair, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Victor Mazereel
- Department of Neurosciences, Center for Clinical Psychiatry, University Psychiatric Center, KU Leuven, Kortenberg, Belgium
| | - Marc Stroobants
- Biomedical Library, University Psychiatric Center, KU Leuven, Kortenberg, Belgium
| | - Livia De Picker
- Collaborative Antwerp Psychiatric Research Institute, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
- University Psychiatric Hospital Campus Duffel, Duffel, Belgium
| | - Kristof Van Assche
- Antwerp Health Law and Ethics Chair, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
- Research Group Personal Rights and Property Rights, Faculty of Law, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Johan Detraux
- Department of Neurosciences, Public Health Psychiatry, University Psychiatric Center, KU Leuven, Kortenberg, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
De Hert M, Loos S, Sterckx S, Thys E, Van Assche K. Improving control over euthanasia of persons with psychiatric illness: Lessons from the first Belgian criminal court case concerning euthanasia. Front Psychiatry 2022; 13:933748. [PMID: 35928783 PMCID: PMC9343580 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2022.933748] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/01/2022] [Accepted: 06/30/2022] [Indexed: 12/04/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Belgium is one of very few countries that legally allow euthanasia for suffering caused by psychiatric illness. In the first criminal trial in Belgium of physicians involved in euthanasia, three physicians recently faced the accusation of "murder by poisoning," for allegedly having failed to comply with several requirements of the Belgian Euthanasia Law in granting the euthanasia request a woman suffering from psychiatric illness. Although all three physicians were acquitted, the case generated much debate among policy makers, medical professionals, and the general public. METHOD We use this trial as the starting point for a critical analysis of the adequacy of the three-level control system established in the Euthanasia Law, as it is applied in the evaluation of euthanasia requests from persons who suffer unbearably from a psychiatric illness. This analysis is based on information presented during the criminal trial as well as information on the euthanasia that was published in the press. RESULTS Our analysis highlights substantial problems in the assessment and granting of the euthanasia request. The patient was euthanized without it having been substantiated that her psychiatric illness had no prospect of improvement and that her suffering could not be alleviated. The three-step control system enshrined in the Law and promoted by the Federal Control and Evaluation Commission for Euthanasia appears to have failed at each level. CONCLUSION To evaluate requests for euthanasia for mental suffering caused by psychiatric illness, the requirements of the Belgian Euthanasia Law should be complemented by mandating the advice of two psychiatrists, and face-to-face discussions between all physicians involved. In parallel with the process of evaluating the euthanasia request, a treatment track should be guaranteed where reasonable evidence-based treatments and recovery-oriented options are tried.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marc De Hert
- University Psychiatric Centre, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.,Department of Neurosciences, Centre for Clinical Psychiatry, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.,Leuven Brain Institute, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.,Antwerp Health Law and Ethics Chair, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Sien Loos
- Research Group Personal Rights and Property Rights, Faculty of Law, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium.,Leuven Institute for Healthcare Policy, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Sigrid Sterckx
- Bioethics Institute Ghent, Department of Philosophy and Moral Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Erik Thys
- University Psychiatric Centre, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.,Department of Neurosciences, Centre for Clinical Psychiatry, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Kristof Van Assche
- Antwerp Health Law and Ethics Chair, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium.,Research Group Personal Rights and Property Rights, Faculty of Law, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Thom RL, Dalle-Ave A, Bunnik EM, Krones T, Van Assche K, Ruck Keene A, Cronin AJ. Inequitable Access to Transplants: Adults With Impaired Decision-Making Capacity. Transpl Int 2022; 35:10084. [PMID: 35368648 PMCID: PMC8971203 DOI: 10.3389/ti.2022.10084] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/30/2021] [Accepted: 02/11/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022]
Abstract
Inequitable access to deceased donor organs for transplantation has received considerable scrutiny in recent years. Emerging evidence suggests patients with impaired decision-making capacity (IDC) face inequitable access to transplantation. The "Ethical and Legal Issues" working group of the European Society of Transplantation undertook an expert consensus process. Literature relating to transplantation in patients with IDC was examined and collated to investigate whether IDC is associated with inferior transplant outcomes and the legitimacy of this healthcare inequality was examined. Even though the available evidence of inferior transplant outcomes in these patients is limited, the working group concluded that access to transplantation in patients with IDC may be inequitable. Consequently, we argue that IDC should not in and of itself be considered as a barrier to either registration on the transplant waiting list or allocation of an organ. Strategies for non-discrimination should focus on ensuring eligibility is based upon sound evidence and outcomes without reference to non-medical criteria. Recommendations to support policy makers and healthcare providers to reduce unintended inequity and inadvertent discrimination are set out. We call upon transplant centres and national bodies to include data on decision-making capacity in routine reporting schedules in order to improve the evidence base upon which organ policy decisions are made going forward.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Anne Dalle-Ave
- Ethics Unit, Institute of Humanities in Medicine, University Hospital of Lausanne, London, United Kingdom
| | - Eline M Bunnik
- Department of Medical Ethics, Philosophy and History of Medicine, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Tanja Krones
- Department of Clinical Ethics, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.,Institute of Biomedical Ethics and History of Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | | | - Alex Ruck Keene
- 39 Essex Chambers, London, United Kingdom.,King's College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Antonia J Cronin
- Guy's and St. Thomas' NHS Trust and King's College London, London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Mazereel V, Van Assche K, Detraux J, De Hert M. COVID-19 vaccination for people with severe mental illness: why, what, and how? Lancet Psychiatry 2021; 8:444-450. [PMID: 33548184 PMCID: PMC7906686 DOI: 10.1016/s2215-0366(20)30564-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 91] [Impact Index Per Article: 30.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/20/2020] [Revised: 12/09/2020] [Accepted: 12/10/2020] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
Psychiatric disorders, and especially severe mental illness, are associated with an increased risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection and COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality. People with severe mental illness should therefore be prioritised in vaccine allocation strategies. Here, we discuss the risk for worse COVID-19 outcomes in this vulnerable group, the effect of severe mental illness and psychotropic medications on vaccination response, the attitudes of people with severe mental illness towards vaccination, and, the potential barriers to, and possible solutions for, an efficient vaccination programme in this population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Victor Mazereel
- Center for Clinical Psychiatry, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Department of Neurosciences, and University Psychiatric Center, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Kristof Van Assche
- Research Group Personal Rights and Property Rights, Faculty of Law, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Johan Detraux
- Public Health Psychiatry, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Department of Neurosciences, and University Psychiatric Center, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Marc De Hert
- Center for Clinical Psychiatry, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Department of Neurosciences, and University Psychiatric Center, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Antwerp Health Law and Ethics Chair, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium.
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Affiliation(s)
- Marc De Hert
- Department of Neurosciences, Center for Clinical Psychiatry, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
- Antwerp Health Law and Ethics Chair, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Victor Mazereel
- Department of Neurosciences, Center for Clinical Psychiatry, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
- University Psychiatric Center KU Leuven, Leuven-Kortenberg, Belgium
| | - Johan Detraux
- University Psychiatric Center KU Leuven, Leuven-Kortenberg, Belgium
- Department of Neurosciences, Public Health Psychiatry, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Kristof Van Assche
- Research Group Personal Rights and Property Rights, Faculty of Law, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Burnapp L, Van Assche K, Lennerling A, Slaats D, Van Dellen D, Mamode N, Citterio F, Zuidema W, Weimar W, Dor FJMF. Raising awareness of unspecified living kidney donation: an ELPAT view. Clin Kidney J 2020; 13:159-165. [PMID: 32296519 PMCID: PMC7147300 DOI: 10.1093/ckj/sfz067] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/18/2018] [Accepted: 04/08/2019] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) is the preferred treatment for patients with end-stage renal disease and unspecified living kidney donation is morally justified. Despite the excellent outcomes of LDKT, unspecified kidney donation (UKD) is limited to a minority of European countries due to legal constraints and moral objections. Consequently, there are significant variations in practice and approach between countries and the contribution of UKD is undervalued. Where UKD is accepted as routine, an increasing number of patients in the kidney exchange programme are successfully transplanted when a 'chain' of transplants is triggered by a single unspecified donor. By expanding the shared living donor pool, the benefit of LDKT is extended to patients who do not have their own living donor because a recipient on the national transplant list always completes the chain. Is there a moral imperative to increase the scope of UKD and how could this be achieved? METHODS An examination of the literature and individual country practices was performed to identify the limitations on UKD in Europe and recommend strategies to increase transplant opportunities. RESULTS Primary limitations to UKD, key players and their roles and responsibilities were identified. CONCLUSIONS Raising awareness to encourage the public to volunteer to donate is appropriate and desirable to increase UKD. Recommendations are made to provide a framework for increasing awareness and engagement in UKD. The public, healthcare professionals, policy makers and society and religious leaders have a role to play in creating an environment for change.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lisa Burnapp
- Department of Transplantation and Nephrology, Guy’s & St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | | | - Annette Lennerling
- Department of Transplantation, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Dorthe Slaats
- Department Internal Medicine, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - David Van Dellen
- Department of Surgery, Manchester Royal Infirmary, Manchester, UK
| | - Nizam Mamode
- Department of Transplantation and Nephrology, Guy’s & St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Franco Citterio
- Renal Transplantation Unit, Catholic University, Rome, Italy
| | - Willij Zuidema
- Department Internal Medicine, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Willem Weimar
- Department Internal Medicine, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Frank J M F Dor
- Imperial College Renal and Transplant Centre, Hammersmith Hospital, Imperial College, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Martin DE, Van Assche K, Domínguez-Gil B, López-Fraga M, Garcia Gallont R, Muller E, Rondeau E, Capron AM. A new edition of the Declaration of Istanbul: updated guidance to combat organ trafficking and transplant tourism worldwide. Kidney Int 2020; 95:757-759. [PMID: 30904066 DOI: 10.1016/j.kint.2019.01.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/12/2018] [Revised: 11/29/2018] [Accepted: 01/02/2019] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Affiliation(s)
| | - Kristof Van Assche
- Research Group, Personal Rights and Property Rights, Antwerp University, Antwerp, Belgium
| | | | - Marta López-Fraga
- European Directorate for the Quality of Medicines & HealthCare (EDQM), Council of Europe, Strasbourg, France
| | | | - Elmi Muller
- Department of Surgery, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa
| | - Eric Rondeau
- Department of Emergency Nephrology and Renal Transplantation, Tenon Hospital, APHP (Public Assistance Hospital of Paris), Sorbonne University, Paris, France
| | - Alexander M Capron
- Gould School of Law and Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Van de Velde S, Van Eekert N, Van Assche K, Sommerland N, Wouters E. Characteristics of Women Who Present for Abortion Beyond the Legal Limit in Flanders, Belgium. Perspect Sex Reprod Health 2019; 51:175-183. [PMID: 31509652 DOI: 10.1363/psrh.12116] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/30/2018] [Revised: 04/24/2019] [Accepted: 05/08/2019] [Indexed: 06/10/2023]
Abstract
CONTEXT Women who seek abortion care beyond the first trimester of gestation are often in a vulnerable socioeconomic position with limited social support, and in Belgium, the details of their circumstances are insufficiently understood. A better understanding of this group is essential to a critical evaluation of Belgian abortion policy, which restricts abortions on request after the first trimester. METHODS Anonymized patient records were collected between 2013 and 2016 from LUNA centers, which are non-hospital-based abortion clinics in Flanders. Logistic regression analyses were used to identify associations between women's characteristics and whether they presented within or beyond the legal limit, which was 13 weeks and 1 day at the time of the study. RESULTS A total of 28,741 women requested an abortion, and 972 individuals (3.4%) presented beyond the legal limit; 29% of these latter women were unable to receive abortion care as a result of the mandatory six-day waiting period. Characteristics positively associated with presenting beyond the limit, instead of beforehand, were being younger than 20, as opposed to 20-24 (odds ratio, 1.7); receiving a primary, lower secondary, upper secondary or special-needs education, rather than a higher education (1.8-3.1); being unemployed, rather than employed (1.3); and holding Belgian rather than a foreign nationality (0.8). Being accompanied by someone to the LUNA center (0.8), having irregularly (0.6) or regularly used contraceptives (0.7), and having ever had an abortion (0.8) were negatively associated with presenting beyond, rather than before, the limit. CONCLUSIONS A fuller consideration of patients' characteristics when evaluating Belgian abortion policy is needed to ensure that the needs and rights of socioeconomically vulnerable women are addressed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah Van de Velde
- Centre for Population, Family and Health and the Department of Sociology, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Nina Van Eekert
- Centre for Population, Family and Health and the Department of Sociology, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
- Centre for Population, Family and Health
- Department of Sociology, University of Antwerp, and International Centre for Reproductive Health, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
| | | | - Nina Sommerland
- Centre for Population, Family and Health and the Department of Sociology, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Edwin Wouters
- Centre for Population, Family and Health and the Department of Sociology, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Verhofstadt M, Van Assche K, Sterckx S, Audenaert K, Chambaere K. Psychiatric patients requesting euthanasia: Guidelines for sound clinical and ethical decision making. Int J Law Psychiatry 2019; 64:150-161. [PMID: 31122625 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijlp.2019.04.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 32] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/11/2019] [Revised: 03/28/2019] [Accepted: 04/03/2019] [Indexed: 06/09/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Since Belgium legalised euthanasia, the number of performed euthanasia cases for psychological suffering in psychiatric patients has significantly increased, as well as the number of media reports on controversial cases. This has prompted several healthcare organisations and committees to develop policies on the management of these requests. METHOD Five recent initiatives that offer guidance on euthanasia requests by psychiatric patients in Flanders were analysed: the protocol of Ghent University Hospital and advisory texts of the Flemish Federation of Psychiatry, the Brothers of Charity, the Belgian Advisory Committee on Bioethics, and Zorgnet-Icuro. These were examined via critical point-by-point reflection, focusing on all legal due care criteria in order to identify: 1) proposed measures to operationalise the evaluation of the legal criteria; 2) suggestions of additional safeguards going beyond these criteria; and 3) remaining fields of tension. RESULTS The initiatives are well in keeping with the legal requirements but are often more stringent. Additional safeguards that are formulated include the need for at least two positive advices from at least two psychiatrists; an a priori evaluation system; and a two-track approach, focusing simultaneously on the assessment of the patient's euthanasia request and on that person's continuing treatment. Although the initiatives are similar in intent, some differences in approach were found, reflecting different ethical stances towards euthanasia and an emphasis on practical clinical assessment versus broad ethical reflection. CONCLUSIONS All initiatives offer useful guidance for the management of euthanasia requests by psychiatric patients. By providing information on, and proper operationalisations of, the legal due care criteria, these initiatives are important instruments to prevent potential abuses. Apart from the additional safeguards suggested, the importance of a decision-making policy that includes many actors (e.g. the patient's relatives and other care providers) and of good aftercare for the bereaved are rightly stressed. Shortcomings of the initiatives relate to the aftercare of patients whose euthanasia request is rejected, and to uncertainty regarding the way in which attending physicians should manage negative or conflicting advices, or patients' suicide threats in case of refusal. Given the scarcity of data on how thoroughly and uniformly requests are handled in practice, it is unclear to what extent the recommendations made in these guidelines are currently being implemented.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Monica Verhofstadt
- End-of-Life Care Research Group, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Ghent University, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000 Ghent, Belgium.
| | - Kristof Van Assche
- Research Group Personal Rights and Property Rights, Antwerp University, Stadscampus Venusstraat 23, 2000 Antwerp, Belgium.
| | - Sigrid Sterckx
- End-of-Life Care Research Group, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Ghent University, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000 Ghent, Belgium; Bioethics Institute Ghent, Ghent University, Blandijnberg 2, 9000 Ghent, Belgium.
| | - Kurt Audenaert
- Department of Psychiatry and Medical Psychology, Ghent University, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000 Ghent, Belgium.
| | - Kenneth Chambaere
- End-of-Life Care Research Group, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Ghent University, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000 Ghent, Belgium.
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Abstract
In 2014, the Belgian Euthanasia Law was amended so as to extend the possibility of obtaining euthanasia to minors who have the capacity for discernment. The amendment led to considerable debate among Belgian legal experts, health care professionals and ethicists, in large part due to concerns about the scope and assessment of the minor's 'capacity for discernment', a concept first introduced in Belgian medical law by the amendment. This article offers a critical legal analysis of the concept of 'capacity for discernment' and its implications for euthanasia practice in Belgium. We do so by focusing on a ruling of the Belgian Constitutional Court of 29 October 2015, where the concept figured prominently in the examination of the constitutionality of the amendment. This approach also allows us to shed light on the interpretation of several core aspects of the original 2002 Euthanasia Law and its 2014 amendment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Kasper Raus
- Strategic Policy Unit, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Bert Vanderhaegen
- Roman Catholic Chaplaincy, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Sigrid Sterckx
- Department of Philosophy and Moral Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Feeney O, Cockbain J, Morrison M, Diependaele L, Van Assche K, Sterckx S. Response to Open Peer Commentaries on "Patenting Foundational Technologies: Lessons From CRISPR and Other Core Biotechnologies". Am J Bioeth 2019; 19:W10-W13. [PMID: 30676911 DOI: 10.1080/15265161.2018.1538395] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/09/2023]
|
19
|
Feeney O, Cockbain J, Morrison M, Diependaele L, Van Assche K, Sterckx S. Patenting Foundational Technologies: Lessons From CRISPR and Other Core Biotechnologies. Am J Bioeth 2018; 18:36-48. [PMID: 31159699 DOI: 10.1080/15265161.2018.1531160] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/09/2023]
Abstract
In 2012, a new and promising gene manipulation technique, CRISPR-Cas9, was announced that seems likely to be a foundational technique in health care and agriculture. However, patents have been granted. As with other technological developments, there are concerns of social justice regarding inequalities in access. Given the technologies' "foundational" nature and societal impact, it is vital for such concerns to be translated into workable recommendations for policymakers and legislators. Colin Farrelly has proposed a moral justification for the use of patents to speed up the arrival of technology by encouraging innovation and investment. While sympathetic to his argument, this article highlights a number of problems. By examining the role of patents in CRISPR and in two previous foundational technologies, we make some recommendations for realistic and workable guidelines for patenting and licensing.
Collapse
|
20
|
|
21
|
Van Assche K, Pascalev A. Where are we heading? The legality of human body transplants examined. Issues Law Med 2018; 33:3-18. [PMID: 30831016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/09/2023]
Abstract
In this article the authors examine the legality of human body transplantation under the current state of medical knowledge. The article first analyzes under what conditions an experimental medical procedure may be legitimately performed under international and national law. Then it examines the legal requirements for prior ethics approval and considers the possible civil and criminal liability claims and disciplinary sanctions that may arise if such a procedure would fail. Subsequently, it applies this analysis to investigate whether body transplants would currently be legally allowed. The authors conclude that it is very unlikely that prior ethics approval would be obtained, and emphasize that physicians are likely to be found liable for medical malpractice if body transplantation is performed. If body transplantation results in the death of the patient, the physicians involved would run a considerable risk of being held criminally liable for negligent homicide. The participating physicians also risk severe disciplinary sanctions for professional misconduct, with a real possibility that they will be suspended or even banned from medical practice for life.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Assya Pascalev
- Department of Philosphy and Department of Community and Family Medicine, Howard University, Washington, DC, USA; Bulgarian Center for Bioethics, Sofia, Bulgaria
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Sénécal K, Thys K, Vears DF, Van Assche K, Knoppers BM, Borry P. Legal approaches regarding health-care decisions involving minors: implications for next-generation sequencing. Eur J Hum Genet 2017; 25:658. [PMID: 28406189 DOI: 10.1038/ejhg.2017.41] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/09/2022] Open
|
23
|
Sénécal K, Thys K, Vears DF, Van Assche K, Knoppers BM, Borry P. Legal approaches regarding health-care decisions involving minors: implications for next-generation sequencing. Eur J Hum Genet 2016; 24:1559-1564. [PMID: 27302841 PMCID: PMC5110060 DOI: 10.1038/ejhg.2016.61] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/30/2015] [Revised: 02/26/2016] [Accepted: 04/12/2016] [Indexed: 12/03/2022] Open
Abstract
The development of next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies are revolutionizing medical practice, facilitating more accurate, sophisticated and cost-effective genetic testing. NGS is already being implemented in the clinic assisting diagnosis and management of disorders with a strong heritable component. Although considerable attention has been paid to issues regarding return of incidental or secondary findings, matters of consent are less well explored. This is particularly important for the use of NGS in minors. Recent guidelines addressing genomic testing and screening of children and adolescents have suggested that as 'young children' lack decision-making capacity, decisions about testing must be conducted by a surrogate, namely their parents. This prompts consideration of the age at which minors can provide lawful consent to health-care interventions, and consequently NGS performed for diagnostic purposes. Here, we describe the existing legal approaches regarding the rights of minors to consent to health-care interventions, including how laws in the 28 Member States of the European Union and in Canada consider competent minors, and then apply this to the context of NGS. There is considerable variation in the rights afforded to minors across countries. Many legal systems determine that minors would be allowed, or may even be required, to make decisions about interventions such as NGS. However, minors are often considered as one single homogeneous population who always require parental consent, rather than recognizing there are different categories of 'minors' and that capacity to consent or to be involved in discussions and decision-making process is a spectrum rather than a hurdle.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Karine Sénécal
- Centre of Genomics and Policy, Department of Human Genetics, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Kristof Thys
- Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Danya F Vears
- Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Kristof Van Assche
- Research Group on Personality Rights and Property Rights, Faculty of Law, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Bartha M Knoppers
- Centre of Genomics and Policy, Department of Human Genetics, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Pascal Borry
- Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Van Assche K, Gutwirth S, Sterckx S. Protecting Dignitary Interests of Biobank Research Participants: Lessons fromHavasupai Tribe v Arizona Board of Regents. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2015. [DOI: 10.5235/17579961.5.1.54] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/05/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Kristof Van Assche
- Kristof Van Assche and Serge Gutwirth, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Belgium
| | - Serge Gutwirth
- Kristof Van Assche and Serge Gutwirth, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Belgium
| | - Sigrid Sterckx
- Sigrid Sterckx, Ghent University and Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Belgium. All websites accessed June 2013
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Van Assche K, Capitaine L, Pennings G, Sterckx S. Governing the postmortem procurement of human body material for research. Kennedy Inst Ethics J 2015; 25:67-88. [PMID: 25843120 DOI: 10.1353/ken.2015.0000] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/04/2023]
Abstract
Human body material removed post mortem is a particularly valuable resource for research. Considering the efforts that are currently being made to study the biochemical processes and possible genetic causes that underlie cancer and cardiovascular and neurodegenerative diseases, it is likely that this type of research will continue to gain in importance. However, post mortem procurement of human body material for research raises specific ethical concerns, more in particular with regard to the consent of the research participant. In this paper, we attempt to determine which consent regime should govern the post mortem procurement of body material for research. In order to do so, we assess the various arguments that could be put forward in support of a duty to make body material available for research purposes after death. We argue that this duty does in practice not support conscription but is sufficiently strong to defend a policy of presumed rather than explicit consent.
Collapse
|
26
|
Frunza M, Van Assche K, Lennerling A, Citterio F, Burnapp L, Mamode N, Sterckx S, Zuidema W, Weimar W, Dor F. Dealing with public solicitation of organs from living donors — An ELPAT view. Transpl Immunol 2014. [DOI: 10.1016/j.trim.2014.11.211] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/24/2022]
|
27
|
Affiliation(s)
- Marta López-Fraga
- European Committee on Organ Transplantation, European Directorate for the Quality of Medicines & HealthCare, Council of Europe, F-67081 Strasbourg, France.
| | | | - Alexander M Capron
- Pacific Center for Health Policy and Ethics, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Kristof Van Assche
- Research Group on Law, Science, Technology and Society, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Dominique Martin
- Centre for Health and Society, School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VA, Australia
| | - Emanuele Cozzi
- Centro Nazionale Trapianti, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy; Transplant Immunology Unit, Padua University Hospital, Padua, Italy
| | - Francis L Delmonico
- The Transplantation Society, Montreal, QC, Canada; Advisory for Human Transplantation, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland; Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA; New England Organ Bank, Waltham, MA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Abstract
With the case of Belgium as a negative example, this paper will evaluate the legitimacy of using mentally incompetents as organ sources. The first section examines the underlying moral dilemma that results from the necessity of balancing the principle of respect for persons with the obligation to help people in desperate need. We argue for the rejection of a radical utilitarian approach but also question the appropriateness of a categorical prohibition. Section two aims to strike a fair balance between the competing interests at stake and to define the conditions under which organ harvest from mentally incompetents might be morally acceptable. To this end, we morally assess the main requirements that have been put forward to allow organ removal from incompetent donors. We conclude that the current Belgian legislation is far too permissive and that national regulations that do not permit the harvest of non-regenerable organs from mentally incompetents in exceptional circumstances are too restrictive. On the basis of this discussion, we propose a number of guiding principles for decision-making in this area.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kristof Van Assche
- Faculty of Law and Criminology of the Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB) University of Liège (ULg), Belgium Ghent University, Belgium and Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB)
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
29
|
Capitaine L, Van Assche K, Pennings G, Sterckx S. Pediatric priority in kidney allocation: challenging its acceptability. Transpl Int 2014; 27:533-40. [DOI: 10.1111/tri.12280] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/19/2013] [Revised: 09/13/2013] [Accepted: 01/24/2014] [Indexed: 01/08/2023]
Affiliation(s)
| | - Kristof Van Assche
- Research Group on Law, Science, Technology and Society; Vrije Universiteit Brussel; Brussels Belgium
| | - Guido Pennings
- Bioethics Institute Ghent; Ghent University; Ghent Belgium
| | - Sigrid Sterckx
- Bioethics Institute Ghent; Ghent University; Ghent Belgium
- Research Group on Law, Science, Technology and Society; Vrije Universiteit Brussel; Brussels Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Capitaine L, Thys K, Van Assche K, Sterckx S, Pennings G. Should minors be considered as potential living liver donors? Liver Transpl 2013; 19:649-55. [PMID: 23463629 DOI: 10.1002/lt.23633] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/23/2012] [Accepted: 02/24/2013] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
For many patients, living donor liver transplantation represents their only hope of receiving a lifesaving graft. In certain (albeit rare) cases, a minor will be the only suitable donor. Living liver donation by minors has been reported in several countries. In the academic literature and professional guidelines, little attention is paid to the development of an ethical framework for this practice. The focus is frequently limited to the donation of regenerative tissues and kidneys. However, liver donation differs in important respects because of the increased medical risks and the lack of substitute therapies. Therefore, in this article, we assess whether living liver donation by minors is ethically appropriate. We argue that living liver donation by minors is justifiable only if minors possess the capacity to consent to donation or if the procedure is in their best interests. Although minors may possess adult-like levels of cognitive maturity, they lack sufficient psychosocial maturity to give valid consent to donation. In addition, living liver donation is generally not in a minor's best interests. With respect to the latter, the potential psychological benefits that a minor may experience as a result of living liver donation are insufficiently empirically supported and are unlikely to outweigh the short- and long-term medical and psychological risks. Therefore, we conclude that minors should not be considered as potential living liver donors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Laura Capitaine
- Bioethics Institute Ghent, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
31
|
Thys K, Van Assche K, Nobile H, Siebelink M, Aujoulat I, Schotsmans P, Dobbels F, Borry P. Could minors be living kidney donors? A systematic review of guidelines, position papers and reports. Transpl Int 2013; 26:949-60. [DOI: 10.1111/tri.12097] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/17/2012] [Revised: 01/05/2013] [Accepted: 03/10/2013] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Kristof Thys
- Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law; University of Leuven; Belgium
| | - Kristof Van Assche
- Research Group on Law, Science, Technology and Society; Vrije Universiteit Brussel; Belgium
| | - Hélène Nobile
- Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law; University of Leuven; Belgium
- German Institute of Human Nutrition (DIfE); Potsdam-Rehbrücke Germany
| | - Marion Siebelink
- University of Groningen; University Medical Centre Groningen; The Netherlands
| | - Isabelle Aujoulat
- Institute of Health & Society; Université Catholique de Louvain; Belgium
| | - Paul Schotsmans
- Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law; University of Leuven; Belgium
| | - Fabienne Dobbels
- Centre for Health Services and Nursing Research; University of Leuven; Belgium
| | - Pascal Borry
- Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law; University of Leuven; Belgium
| |
Collapse
|