CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 283Palliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesPalliative and Oncologic CareEthics and bioethics in healthcare

Legal physician-assisted dying in Oregon and the Netherlands: evidence concerning the impact on patients in “vulnerable” groups

Open access
Battin, Margaret P, van der Heide, Agnes, Ganzini, Linda, van der Wal, Gerrit, Onwuteaka-Philipsen, Bregje D·2007·Journal of Medical Ethics
DOI 10.1136/jme.2007.022335PMC PMC2652799
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Debates over legalisation of physician-assisted suicide (PAS) or euthanasia often warn of a "slippery slope", predicting abuse of people in vulnerable groups. To assess this concern, the authors examined data from Oregon and the Netherlands, the two principal jurisdictions in which physician-assisted dying is legal and data have been collected over a substantial period. METHODS: The data from Oregon (where PAS, now called death under the Oregon Death with Dignity Act, is legal) comprised all annual and cumulative Department of Human Services reports 1998-2006 and three independent studies; the data from the Netherlands (where both PAS and euthanasia are now legal) comprised all four government-commissioned nationwide studies of end-of-life decision making (1990, 1995, 2001 and 2005) and specialised studies. Evidence of any disproportionate impact on 10 groups of potentially vulnerable patients was sought. RESULTS: Rates of assisted dying in Oregon and in the Netherlands showed no evidence of heightened risk for the elderly, women, the uninsured (inapplicable in the Netherlands, where all are insured), people with low educational status, the poor, the physically disabled or chronically ill, minors, people with psychiatric illnesses including depression, or racial or ethnic minorities, compared with background populations. The only group with a heightened risk was people with AIDS. While extralegal cases were not the focus of this study, none have been uncovered in Oregon; among extralegal cases in the Netherlands, there was no evidence of higher rates in vulnerable groups. CONCLUSIONS: Where assisted dying is already legal, there is no current evidence for the claim that legalised PAS or euthanasia will have disproportionate impact on patients in vulnerable groups. Those who received physician-assisted dying in the jurisdictions studied appeared to enjoy comparative social, economic, educational, professional and other privileges.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/jme.2007.022335

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The idea that eligibility criteria in ADE regulations are gradually expanded, or that vulnerable populations are at greater risk, is not substantiated by empirical studies.

    “The idea that eligibility criteria in ADE regulations are gradually expanded, or that vulnerable populations are at greater risk is not substantiated by empirical studies [14–16].”

    From Trends in assisted dying among patients with psychiatric disorders and dementia in Belgium: A health registry study (2025) · cites this paper as [15]

    The Results and Conclusions report no evidence of heightened risk for most vulnerable groups studied in Oregon and the Netherlands, while identifying people with AIDS as an exception. The paper does not assess whether regulatory eligibility criteria gradually expand, so it supports only the vulnerable-populations part of the claim. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 27 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Battin, M. P., van der Heide, A., Ganzini, L., van der Wal, G., & Onwuteaka-Philipsen, B. D.
Affiliations
  • University of Utah (US)
  • Oregon Health & Science University (US)
  • Amsterdam Public Health (NL)
Corresponding author
Battin, Margaret P
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Medical Ethics
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2007-09-28
Volume
33
Issue
10
Pages
591-597
ISSN
  • 0306-6800 (ISSN-L)
  • 1473-4257
DOI
10.1136/jme.2007.022335
PMC
PMC2652799
OpenAlex
W2138074567
Cited by
283
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 47 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 15
FWCI
14.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Medical Ethics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
  • DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative and Oncologic Care
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
Keywords
physician-assisted death, physician-assisted suicide, euthanasia, vulnerable populations, vulnerable patients, Oregon Death with Dignity Act, Netherlands, AIDS, end-of-life decisions, slippery slope
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Attitude of Health Personnel, Attitude to Death, Euthanasia, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Netherlands, Oregon, Practice Patterns, Physicians', Physicians, Right to Die, Risk Factors, Socioeconomic Factors, Suicide, Assisted, Terminally Ill, Vulnerable Populations

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review