PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - R S Magnusson TI - Euthanasia: above ground, below ground AID - 10.1136/jme.2003.005090 DP - 2004 Oct 01 TA - Journal of Medical Ethics PG - 441--446 VI - 30 IP - 5 4099 - http://jme.bmj.com/content/30/5/441.short 4100 - http://jme.bmj.com/content/30/5/441.full SO - J Med Ethics2004 Oct 01; 30 AB - The key to the euthanasia debate lies in how best to regulate what doctors do. Opponents of euthanasia frequently warn of the possible negative consequences of legalising physician assisted suicide and active euthanasia (PAS/AE) while ignoring the covert practice of PAS/AE by doctors and other health professionals. Against the background of survey studies suggesting that anything from 4% to 10% of doctors have intentionally assisted a patient to die, and interview evidence of the unregulated, idiosyncratic nature of underground PAS/AE, this paper assesses three alternatives to the current policy of prohibition. It argues that although legalisation may never succeed in making euthanasia perfectly safe, legalising PAS/AE may nevertheless be safer, and therefore a preferable policy alternative, to prohibition. At a minimum, debate about harm minimisation and the regulation of euthanasia needs to take account of PAS/AE wherever it is practised, both above and below ground.