Vetnews | Mei 2026 26 « BACK TO CONTENTS Article which it may be right/morally defensible for the doctor to provide assisted dying, even though it is illegal’. The statement, ‘Assisted dying should be permitted also for persons suffering from an incurable chronic disease, but who are not dying,’ had the lowest consensus (43%) (Table 2). Agreement with all four questions was significantly higher among females than among males (Additional Table 1 – Veterinarians’ agreement on assisted dying by gender). Working in companion animal practice was independently associated with an increased likelihood of positive attitudes towards euthanasia in humans in the multivariable model (Table 3), with companion animal practitioners having 1.66 times higher odds of holding positive attitudes towards euthanasia in humans compared to veterinarians working in mixed clinical practice. Veterinarians’ frequency of Euthanising animals was not independently associated with positive attitudes towards euthanasia in humans. Being younger and being single were also significantly associated with positive attitudes towards euthanasia in humans. We found a significant interaction between gender and marital status (OR = 1.94, 95% CI 1.18 – 3.23), indicating that single women have more positive attitudes towards euthanasia in humans than women with a partner. Performing euthanasia more than five times per week was independently associated with a higher likelihood of serious suicidal thoughts in the multivariable model (Table 4). Veterinarians performing euthanasia five or more times per week had 2.56 times higher odds of having serious suicidal thoughts than those performing euthanasia four or fewer times per week. Being single, having a positive attitude towards human euthanasia, and low perceived colleague support were also significantly associated with a higher likelihood of serious suicidal thoughts. No interaction with gender was found.As there were differences in the relative prevalence of frequency of euthanasia between the different fields of work, we cross-tabulated the frequency of euthanasia with the field of work. This cross-table can be found as an additional file (Additional Table 2 – Cross-table frequency of euthanasia of animals and main field of work). Discussion A major finding of this study is that veterinarians’ views on assisted dying in humans do not differ from those of the general population in Norway [32]. Working in companion animal practices was independently associated with positive attitudes towards euthanasia in humans, while veterinarians’ frequency of Euthanising animals was not. Performing euthanasia more than five times per week was independently associated with serious suicidal thoughts compared to those performing euthanasia four or fewer times per week. Knowledge regarding euthanasia acquired by veterinarians through their work does not seem to lead to a restrictive view of assisted dying in humans. This is in contrast to physicians, where restrictive attitudes towards assisted dying in humans have been shown in several studies [9, 12]. In our study, veterinarians had attitudes towards assisted dying comparable to those of the general population [32], and more liberal attitudes than physicians [12]. This trend is in line with a similar study in Sweden that included veterinarians, physicians, and the general population [9]. Overall, the prevalence of positive attitudes was significantly higher among female veterinarians compared to their male colleagues; however, no gender difference was found in the multivariable model. This is in line with a previous study, where no gender difference in attitudes towards assisted dying was found [9]. The reasons for these seemingly more liberal attitudes towards assisted dying in humans among veterinarians compared to physicians, despite veterinarians’ knowledge and experience with animal euthanasia, are not known. This more liberal view among veterinarians may reflect a general trend in society, as acceptance of assisted dying in humans has increased in most Western European countries [33]. Also, the consequences of legalisation of assisted dying in humans would probably affect the role of the physicians very differently compared to veterinarians, as physicians would probably be more directly involved in patient cases than veterinarians would. This would probably also influence the responses given to this questionnaire among the two professional groups. Statement Strongly agree, n (%) Partially agree, n (%) Neither agree, Partially disagree, nor disagree, n (%) n (%) Strongly disagree, n (%) Total, n 1. ‘Physician-assisted suicide should be permitted for persons suffering from a fatal disease with a short remaining life expectancy.’a 805 (31.5%) 814 (31.9%) 318 (12.5%) 198 (7.8%) 420 (16.4%) 2555 2. ‘Euthanasia should be permitted for persons suffering from a fatal disease with a short remaining life expectancy.’a 666 (26.0%) 738 (28.9%) 399 (15.6%) 252 (9.9%) 500 (19.6%) 2555 3. ‘Assisted dying should be permitted also for persons suffering from an incurable chronic disease, but who are not dying.’a 414 (16.3%) 690 (27.1%) 545 (21.4%) 309 (12.1%) 590 (23.2%) 2548 4. ‘There are cases in which it may be right/morally defensible for the doctor to provide assisted dying, even though it is illegal.’a 525 (20.6%) 787 (30.8%) 432 (16.9%) 243 (9.5%) 568 (22.2%) 2555 Table 2: Veterinarians’ attitudes towards physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia in humans a The prevalence of positive attitudes was significantly higher among female veterinarians compared to their male colleagues in all four statements
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTc5MDU=