arbiter
JournalsPricingAccount

Health professionals’ perspectives on the first Belgian euthanasia criminal trial: A qualitative study

Madeleine Archer et al.

Medical Law International2025https://doi.org/10.1177/09685332251338659article
ABDC C
Weight
0.37

What the paper says

Belgium’s first euthanasia criminal trial was decided in 2020. Existing studies identify the implications of this trial for euthanasia provision for patients with mental disorder, but its broader influences have not been explored. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 14 health professionals who provide euthanasia in Belgium. We constructed themes describing the trial’s practitioner-level and system-level influences. These are (1) the trial prompted fear, insecurity, and a degree of reluctance to provide; (2) some providers adapted their euthanasia decision-making; (3) the trial exposed deficiencies with the Act; (4) the trial clarified some legal requirements; (5) added burdens were placed on health service providers owing to the ‘chilling effect’ of the trial on practice; and (6) the trial prompted changes to the euthanasia regulatory landscape. Participants reported that the trial has significantly influenced euthanasia practice including patient access and practitioner participation. Measures are needed to address these implications if they persist.

1 citation

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/09685332251338659

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{madeleine2025,
  title        = {{Health professionals’ perspectives on the first Belgian euthanasia criminal trial: A qualitative study}},
  author       = {Madeleine Archer et al.},
  journal      = {Medical Law International},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/09685332251338659},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Health professionals’ perspectives on the first Belgian euthanasia criminal trial: A qualitative study

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.37

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.16 × 0.4 = 0.06
M · momentum0.53 × 0.15 = 0.08
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.