Background As our society is ageing, nursing homes are finding it increasingly difficult to deal with an expanding population of patients with dementia and a decreasing workforce. A potential answer to this problem might lie in the use of technology. However, the use and application of surveillance technology in dementia care has led to considerable ethical debate among healthcare professionals and ethicists, with no clear consensus to date. Aim To explore how surveillance technology is viewed by care professionals and ethicists (...) working in the field, by investigating the ideal application of surveillance technology in the residential care of people with dementia. Methods Use was made of the concept mapping method, a computer-assisted procedure consisting of five steps: brainstorming, prioritising, clustering, processing by the computer and analysis. Various participants (ranging from ethicists to physicians and nurses) were invited on the basis of their professional background. Results The views generated are grouped into six categories ranging from the need for a right balance between freedom and security, to be beneficial and tailored to the resident, and clearly defined procedures to competent and caring personnel, active monitoring and clear normative guidance. The results are presented in the form of a graphic chart. Conclusions There appears to be an inherent duality in the views on using surveillance technology which is rooted in the moral conflict between safety and freedom. Elaboration of this ethical issue has proved to be very difficult. (shrink)

For more than two decades euthanasia and assisted suicide have been openly debated in the Netherlands. This development started in 1973 when the Regional Court in Leeuwarden decided a case in which a physician had administered a deadly dose of morphine to her terminally ill mother on the mother's serious and persistent request. In this case the court concluded that the average Dutch physician no longer considered it his or her duty to prolong a patient's life under all circumstances. The (...) court accepted that in specific cases a physician is allowed to prevent serious and irreversible suffering, even if the patient's life is short ened. This case was the first in which a legal opening for euthanasia or assisted suicide was created. In this specific case the physician was formally declared guilty, but the court gave her a suspended sentence of one week imprisonment. This decision started a debate on euthanasia and assisted suicide throughout all levels of Dutch society. (shrink)