{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022975929978118162, 'fraction_numerical': 0.00437636761487965, 'mean_word_length': 5.1, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Dutch perspectives on the British Medical Association's critique of euthanasia in the Netherlands.

During the summer of 1999, extensive interviews with some of the leading authorities on the euthanasia policy were conducted in the Netherlands. They were asked: The British Medical Association, in its memorandum before the House of Lords, held that in regard to Holland, "all seem to agree that the so-called rules of careful conduct (official guidelines for euthanasia) are disregarded in some cases. Breaches of rules range from the practice of involuntary euthanasia to failure to consult another practitioner before carrying out euthanasia and to certifying the cause of death as natural". What do you think? Most of the interviewees conceded that this assertion is, indeed, correct. Two interviewees didn't pay much notice to the issue and three others said that the British critique is both true and untrue.