2026年9月29日 / 美国东部时间上午10:41 / 哥伦比亚广播公司新闻
荷兰一政府审查委员会证实，该国医生已对一名严重残疾的1岁幼儿实施安乐死。这是荷兰官方通报的首例依据新规则开展的此类案件，新规允许这个欧洲国家为1至12岁的重症儿童终止生命。
据荷兰12岁以下晚期堕胎及新生儿与儿童生命终止审查委员会发布的评估报告，这名未公开性别和身份的幼儿患有广泛且不可逆的脑损伤、重度脑瘫、癫痫和视力障碍。该委员会负责审查此类案件。
委员会表示，这名幼儿在26周零3天时早产，当时其家人身处国外。随后幼儿出现严重并发症，包括多次感染引发败血症。后续核磁共振成像显示其脑部存在广泛损伤。
这名幼儿发展出痉挛性脑瘫，被认为伴有大脑性视力障碍。在8个月大时，该幼儿还被诊断为婴儿痉挛症，这是一种重症癫痫。
就在这名幼儿即将满2岁时，医生评估其发育年龄仅约6周。
委员会称：“就运动技能、行为和个性而言，‘为人’的方方面面都受到了严重影响，且不会有任何改善。”
并非所有参与评估该幼儿的医生都同意在治疗过程中实施安乐死的决定。
负责该幼儿治疗的医生曾寻求其所在地区以外的医师提供独立意见，这些医师得出结论称“该幼儿并未持续遭受难以忍受的痛苦”，且“仍存在合理替代方案，例如姑息治疗选项和其他可能更好控制癫痫发作的药物”，审查委员会如是表示。
后续尝试了进一步治疗，但委员会称该治疗带来了额外副作用，因此被终止。另一名独立医生随后得出结论，该幼儿的痛苦明确且难以忍受，且符合该国法律规定的终止生命的条件。
委员会最终认定，实施安乐死的医生“行事谨慎得当”。
荷兰于2024年出台上述新规，适用于那些遭受难以忍受的痛苦且毫无康复希望、医生认定没有其他合理方式可以结束其痛苦的儿童。
为这名幼儿实施安乐死的医生此后公开谈及此案，他在NOS/Nieuwsuur时事节目中表示，这一前所未有的手术流程让他感到脆弱。
“作为一名医生，你处于极其脆弱的境地，因为这种情况以前从未发生过，”他说，“近一年来，我始终感觉有一把达摩克利斯之剑悬在头顶。”
这名医生表示，他希望这项裁决能帮助其他面临类似处境的家庭与医生讨论这一选项。
“我认为有些家长此前从未敢讨论过结束孩子生命的可能性，”他说，“希望这项裁决能为这些家长提供支持，让他们能够与主治医生讨论这一选项。”
他将在这类情况下允许终止生命描述为“儿童的一种解放”。
荷兰于2002年成为全球首个将安乐死合法化的国家，该法律同时允许12岁及以上儿童在严格条件下提出安乐死申请。在荷兰非法实施安乐死的医生最高可被判处12年监禁并处罚款。
委员会称：“针对12岁以下儿童终止生命的指导原则是，医生必须根据当前医学观点得出结论，终止生命是结束该幼儿难以忍受的痛苦且毫无康复希望的唯一合理方式。”
Severely disabled toddler euthanized in the Netherlands under new rules on the controversial practice
September 29, 2026 / 10:41 AM EDT / CBS News
A severely disabled 1-year-old child has been euthanized by doctors in the Netherlands, a government review board has confirmed. It is the first case reported by authorities that was guided by new rules allowing for the termination of life of seriously ill children between the ages of 1 and 12 in the European nation.
The child, whose sex and identity have not been disclosed, had extensive and irreversible brain damage, severe cerebral palsy, epilepsy and visual impairment, according to the assessment published by the Netherlands’ Review Committee on Late-term Abortions and Termination of Life of Neonates and Children aged under 12, which is responsible for reviewing such cases.
The committee said the child was born extremely prematurely, at 26 weeks and three days, while the family was abroad. The child then had serious complications, including multiple infections leading to sepsis. An MRI later revealed extensive brain damage.
The child developed spastic cerebral palsy and was believed to have cerebral visual impairment. At 8 months, the child was also diagnosed with infantile epileptic spasms syndrome, a severe form of epilepsy.
Just before the child turned 2, doctors estimated their developmental age to be around 6 weeks.
“Every facet of ‘being human’ in terms of motor skills, behavior and personality was severely affected, and there would be no improvement,” the committee said.
Not all the doctors who assessed the child agreed with the decision to use euthanasia over the course of their treatment.
The doctor leading care for the child sought an independent opinion from “physicians from outside his own region,” who concluded “the child was not continuously suffering unbearably” and that “there were still reasonable alternatives, such as palliative options and other medications that could possibly result in better control of the epileptic seizures,” according to the review committee.
Further treatment was attempted, but the committee said it caused additional side effects so was halted. Another independent doctor subsequently concluded that the child’s suffering was clear and unbearable, and that the requirements for termination of life under the nation’s rules had been met.
The committee ultimately concluded that the physician involved in administering the euthanasia “acted with due care.”
The Netherlands introduced the rules in 2024, which apply to children suffering unbearably with no prospect of improvement, and for whom doctors conclude there is no reasonable alternative to ending their suffering.
The doctor who ended the child’s life has since spoken publicly about the case, saying on the NOS/Nieuwsuur current affairs program that the unprecedented nature of the procedure had left him feeling vulnerable.
“As a doctor, you are in an extremely vulnerable position, because this has never happened before,” he said. “It still feels as if a sword of Damocles has been hanging over your head for almost a year.”
The doctor said he hoped the ruling would help other families facing similar circumstances discuss the option with their physicians.
“I think there are parents out there who have never dared to discuss the option of ending their child’s lives before,” he said. “Hopefully, this ruling provides support to these parents to discuss this option with their treating physician.”
He described allowing termination of life in such circumstances as “a kind of emancipation of the child.”
The Netherlands became the first country in the world to legalize euthanasia in 2002, with the law also allowing children aged 12 and over to request it under strict conditions. Doctors who perform euthanasia unlawfully in the Netherlands risk up to 12 years in prison and a fine.
“The guiding principle for termination of life in children aged under 12 is that the physician must have come to the conclusion that according to prevailing medical opinion termination of life is the only reasonable way to end the child’s unbearable suffering without prospect of improvement,” the committee said.
发表回复