Belgium records 12 euthanasias daily as doctors report emotional strain, rising cases, and growing reliance on specialized teams.
Newsroom (24/04/2026 Gaudium Press) Belgium now records an average of twelve euthanasias per day. In 2025 alone, 4,486 people underwent the procedure, marking a 12.4% increase from the previous year and accounting for 4% of all deaths nationwide. Among them was one minor. The numbers continue to climb steadily, but behind the statistics, a quieter and more complex reality is emerging—one that is increasingly voiced by the doctors themselves.
Some general practitioners are beginning to describe euthanasia not only as a medical or ethical issue, but as a deeply personal burden. For a number of them, the experience of deliberately ending a patient’s life has proven difficult enough to reshape their practice entirely.
A Belgian general practitioner, speaking anonymously, described performing euthanasia three times during his career. Each instance, he said, left a lasting emotional toll. “It has been a very difficult experience for me, both on a human and emotional level,” he explained. After each procedure, he found himself unable to continue working for the rest of the day. “I felt really bad, full of questions, of inner turmoil.”
His testimony reflects a dimension of euthanasia that is largely absent from public debate: the psychological impact on the physicians who carry it out. As requests increase year after year, so too does the pressure on frontline doctors. The profile of patients is also evolving. In 2025, nearly one in four euthanasia cases—24.9%—involved individuals whose life expectancy was not compromised in the short term. This expansion has broadened the range of patients presenting such requests in general practice.
The consequences extend beyond the act itself. According to the same physician, euthanasia can permanently alter the relationship between doctors and the families of deceased patients. “There’s nothing that can be done, but something changes,” he said. In some cases, families choose to leave the practice altogether. “Seeing the doctor who performed euthanasia on a family member again can bring back painful memories.”
This shift introduces a rarely discussed ripple effect: euthanasia may not only end a patient’s life, but also disrupt longstanding bonds of trust between physicians and families—relationships that are central to primary care.
Faced with these pressures, some doctors are stepping back from direct involvement. Rather than performing euthanasia themselves, they are increasingly turning to specialized teams. The physician who shared his experience now relies on organizations such as the Association for the Right to Die with Dignity (ADMD) and the LEIF-EOL consortium.
His role is limited to initiating the process. “I draft the initial report, which I send to a doctor from ADMD or EOL, and they draft the second report,” he explained. From there, specialized teams handle logistics, supplies, the procedure itself, and all administrative requirements, including the death certificate. These teams are often composed of retired general practitioners or former hospital doctors. “Since I adopted this system, I feel much more at ease,” he noted.
This shift toward outsourcing is not occurring in isolation. It aligns with broader structural patterns within Belgium’s euthanasia system. According to the Federal Commission for the Control and Evaluation of Euthanasia’s report covering 2022–2023, only 3% of physicians consulted for second opinions had training in palliative care. By contrast, roughly one-third had received training linked to ADMD.
Such figures suggest that organizations supportive of euthanasia occupy a central role not only in carrying out procedures but also in the mandatory consultation process. This concentration has raised concerns about the independence of oversight mechanisms.
Oversight itself has come under scrutiny. The Commission did not refer a single euthanasia case to the Public Prosecutor’s Office in either 2024 or 2025, despite requesting additional information in nearly a quarter of cases reviewed. The European Institute of Bioethics has argued that the Commission consistently interprets legal requirements loosely, effectively weakening the control it is intended to exercise.
Taken together, these elements point to what some observers describe as a self-reinforcing system. As emotional strain leads general practitioners to withdraw from performing euthanasia, specialized teams—often linked to advocacy organizations—play an increasingly prominent role. At the same time, the body responsible for oversight acknowledges limitations in its ability to enforce stricter control.
Within this system, the experience of individual doctors offers a window into a deeper tension. The rising normalization of euthanasia as a medical practice is unfolding alongside a quieter withdrawal by those once expected to carry it out.
- Raju Hasmukh with files from Infocatholica
Related Images:
