Non-religious arguments to discuss pediatric euthanasia : why should pediatric palliative care use them

Mendes,Joana [UCL] Friedel, Marie [UCL]

Context: Pro euthanasia movements are expanding globally. The debate is sensitive and complex and raises a large spectrum of ethical implications. Although the scope is on adults, Netherlands and Belgium have already extended laws to include pediatric age. Arguments evoked to reject pediatric euthanasia are usually linked as religious convictions. Is this a fact or a myth? How can this perception interfere in the quality of the debate? Aims: Reflect about:1) religious/ the non-religious arguments against pediatric euthanasia, 2) consequences of this misunderstood in the quality of the dialogue in a secularized society. Methods: Ethical approach, based on the principles of Beauchamp & Childress and the doctrine of double effect (Tomas Aquino), used to analyze complex singular situations. Results: Most Pediatric Palliative Care community rejects euthanasia, by the reasons stated by International Children Palliative Network or the European Association of Palliative Care. Arguments are multidimensional, complex and goes far beyond religious convictions: including ethical, psychological considerations, state of the art or cultural and legal framework. In fact, reducing debate to religious arguments, can discredit PPC or introduce mis concepts. In some very complex situations shaped by the media, involving the principle of double effect, religious convictions can be an important bias. On the stories of Charlie Guard and Alfie Evans, pope’s public position about withdrawal of medical interventions can have important consequences on the quality of the information surrounding PPC. Conclusions: The debate surrounding pediatric euthanasia is inescapable, challenging and emerging worldwide. PPC defenders have to point out solid arguments and not contribute to overlapping with religious convictions. This bias can interfere negatively in the quality of the debate, and not contribute for better practices in end of life care that suits children’s best interest.