skip to main content

Euthanasia Legal Position UK — SCE Palliative Medicine MCQ

Instant feedback + full explanation. One question, done properly.

HardCommunication & EthicsEuthanasia Legal Position UKSCE Palliative Medicine

A patient with refractory suffering requests medication intended to cause death. The clinician instead proposes proportionate sedation for refractory symptoms. What is the decisive ethical distinction?

Educational content. Not a substitute for clinical judgement or local policy.

Reveal the answer and explanation

Correct answer: A — Palliative sedation intends symptom relief and titrates depth; it does not intend death

Explanation lettering: D = shown as B · E = shown as D · B = shown as E

A is correct. Proportionate palliative sedation aims to relieve otherwise refractory suffering and titrates the minimum depth needed; death is neither the means nor intended outcome. Euthanasia intentionally causes death. B invents a prognosis threshold. C ignores the central difference in intention, method and proportionality. D would create suffering and is not an ethical test. E misclassifies drugs and risks opioid toxicity. Robust practice documents refractoriness, goals, consent or best interests, drug choice, monitoring and separate decisions about hydration and other treatments. Requests to hasten death also prompt assessment of symptoms, depression, coercion and support.

Reference: EAPC recommended framework for palliative sedation: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2945325/