Wednesday, 23 October 2013

Euthanasia Around the World

Euthanasia is different throughout the world. Here are the rules and regulations that apply to Central and South America, Europe and Asia and the Pacific.

Central & South America
Colombia

Colombia's Constitutional Court in 1997 approved medical voluntary euthanasia but its parliament has never ratified it. Nowadays doctors there frequently do it discreetly and help suffering terminal people to die at their request.

Uruguay

In Uruguay it seems a person must appear in court, yet Article 27 of the Penal Code (effective 1934) says: "The judges are authorized to forego punishment of a person whose previous life has been honorable where he commits a homicide motivated by compassion, induced by repeated requests of the victim." As far as is known, there have been no judicial sentences for mercy killing in Uruguay.

Europe
United Kingdom

In England and Wales there is a possibility of up to 14 years imprisonment for anybody assisting a suicide. Oddly, suicide itself is not a crime. The first prosecutorial policy statement about who will, or will not, risk criminal charges when assisting a suicide, was announced by England & Wales in 2010. Like France, there are laws banning a publication if it leads to a suicide or assisted suicide. But 'Final Exit' can be seen in bookstores in both countries.

Suicide has never been illegal under Scotland law. There is no Scots authority of whether it is criminal to help another to commit suicide, and this has never been tested in court.

The killing of another at his own request is murder, as the consent of the victim is irrelevant in such a case. A person who assists another to take their own life, whether by giving advice or by the provision of the means of committing suicide, might be criminally liable on a number of other grounds such as: recklessly endangering human life, culpable homicide (recklessly giving advice or providing the means, followed by the death of the victim), or wicked recklessness.

Sweden

While it is correct that Sweden has no law specifically proscribing assisted suicide, the prosecutors might charge an assister with manslaughter - and do. In 1979 the Swedish right-to-die leader Berit Hedeby went to prison for a year for helping a man with MS to die.

Norway

Neighbouring Norway has criminal sanctions against assisted suicide by using the charge "accessory to murder". In cases where consent was given and the reasons compassionate, the courts pass lighter sentences. A recent law commission voted down de-criminalizing assisted suicide by a 5-2 vote.

A retired Norwegian physician, Christian Sandsdalen, was found guilty of wilful murder in 2000. He admitted giving an overdose of morphine to a woman chronically ill after 20 years with MS who begged for his help. It cost him his medical license but he was not sent to prison. He appealed the case right up to the Supreme Court and lost every time. Dr. Sandsdalen died a year ago at 82 and, curiously, his funeral was packed with Norway's dignitaries.

Denmark

Denmark has no laws permitting assisted suicide, despite reports that it does.

Finland

Finland has nothing in its criminal code about assisted suicide. Sometimes an assister will inform the law enforcement authorities of him or herself of having aided someone in dying, and provided the action was justified, nothing more happens. Mostly it takes place among friends, who act discreetly. If Finnish doctors were known to practice assisted suicide or euthanasia, the situation might change, although there is no case history.

Germany

Germany has had no penalty for the action since 1751, although it rarely happens there due to the hangover taboo caused by Nazi mass murders, plus powerful, contemporary, church influences. Direct killing by euthanasia is a crime. In 2000 a German appeal court cleared a Swiss clergyman of assisted suicide because there was no such offence, but convicted him of bringing the drugs into the country. There was no imprisonment.
France

France does not have a specific law banning assisted suicide, but such a case could be prosecuted under 223-6 of the Penal Code for failure to assist a person in danger. Convictions are rare and punishments minor. France bans all publications that advise on suicide - 'Final Exit' has been banned since 1991 but few nowadays take any notice of the order.
Italy
In Italy the action is legally forbidden.

Belgium / The Netherlands / Switzerland

Four European countries today openly, legally, authorize assisted dying of terminal patients at their request:

Switzerland (1940)
Belgium (2002)
Netherlands (as well as voluntary euthanasia, lawfully since April 2002, but permitted by the courts since 1984).
Luxembourg (2008)

Belgium and the Netherlands permit voluntary euthanasia, but Switzerland bans death by injection, and all have 'residents only' rules, except Switzerland which alone does not bar foreigners provided they are critically, terminally ill. In 2001 the Swiss National Council confirmed the assisted suicide law but kept the prohibition of euthanasia.
Asia & Pacific
Japan

Japan has medical voluntary euthanasia approved by a high court in 1962 in the Yamagouchi case, but instances are extremely rare, seemingly because of complicated taboos on suicide, dying and death in that country.

New Zealand

New Zealand forbids assistance under 179 of the New Zealand Crimes Act, 1961, but cases are rare and the penalties lenient.
Australia

The Northern Territory of Australia had voluntary euthanasia and assisted suicide for nine months until the Federal Parliament repealed the law in 1997. Only four people were able to use it. Other states have attempted to change the law, so far unsuccessfully.



References

1. Quebec physicians tentatively propose legal euthanasia

2. http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HouseChamberBusiness/ChamberVoteDetail.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&Parl=40&Ses=3&Vote=34

3. http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&Parl=40&Ses=3&DocId=4451353#OOB-310984

Check it Out

Theses are a couple of interesting links that I found regarding current controversies involving euthanasia:
  1. http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/b-c-court-of-appeal-upholds-ban-on-assisted-suicide-1.1492208
  2. http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/LOP/ResearchPublications/2010-68-e.htm
  3. http://ethics-euthanasia.ca/legislation/
  4. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/the-fight-for-the-right-to-die-1.1130837

All these links helped me understand the fight that Canada itself is going through to legalize euthanasia. There are many people for the cause but there are also many people against it. What is your opinion regarding euthanasia in general? Do you think Canada should legalize euthanasia? Leave your comments below.

Tuesday, 22 October 2013

Dr. Donald Low

The story of Dr. Donald Low is a perfect example of euthanasia because he explains what he went through in the case of his disease and pain and why he thinks euthanasia is a good way to end one's own suffering. Dr. Donald Low's full story can be found at:
http://www.thestar.com/news/insight/2013/09/27/dr_donald_lows_resonating_plea_for_assisted_suicide.html


This story reflects Dr. Donald Low's opinion regarding euthanasia and his strong position on making physician assisted suicide legal in Canada. 

Monday, 21 October 2013

Laws on Assisted Suicide

Suicide is not a crime in Canada and hasn't been since 1972, but physician-assisted suicide is illegal.

The Criminal Code of Canada states in section 241(b) that

“Everyone who ….(b) aids or abets a person to commit suicide, whether suicide ensues or not, is guilty of an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years”

However, on Friday, June 15, 2012, the Supreme Court of British Columbia refuted these sections on constitutional grounds as they apply to disabled patients’ capability of giving consent: "the impugned provisions unjustifiably infringe s. 7 [and s. 15 ] of the Charter and are of no force and effect to the extent that they prohibit physician-assisted suicide by a medical practitioner in the context of a physician-patient relationship". Furthermore, the court found that the relevant sections were legislatively too general, had a inconsistent effect on people with disabilities and were "grossly disproportionate to the objectives it is meant to accomplish."

The Minister of Justice and Attorney General has appealed the previous decision regarding the laws that prohibit and punish euthanasia and assisted suicide are constitutionally valid and exist to protect all Canadians, "including those who are most vulnerable, such as people who are sick or elderly or people with disabilities." He also added: "The Supreme Court of Canada acknowledged the state interest in protecting human life and upheld the constitutionality of the existing legislation in Rodriguez (1993). In April 2010, a large majority of Parliamentarians voted not to change these laws, which is an expression of “democratic will” on this topic.                                                                      
                           



References

1. Darryl, Greer (Monday, June 18, 2012). "B.C. Supreme Court Kills Assisted-Suicide Ban". Courthouse News Service. Retrieved 6 July 2012.

2. http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/news-nouv/nr-cp/2012/doc_32769.html

3. Kluge, Eike-Henner W. (2000), "“Assisted Suicide, Ethics and the Law: The Implication of Autonomy and Respect for Persons, Equality and Justice, and Beneficence.”", in Prado, C.G., Assisted Suicide: Canadian Perspectives, Ottawa, Canada: University of Ottawa Press, p. 84

4. http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_96h02_e.htm



Euthanasia Debate

Generally, the euthanasia debate has focused on various key concerns. According to euthanasia opponent Ezekiel Emanuel, supporters of euthanasia have presented four main arguments:

a) People have the right to self-determination and should be able to choose their own fate;

b) Helping one to die at their own will is a better option than making them suffer;

c) The difference between passive euthanasia, which is acceptable and active euthanasia, which is prohibited is irrational; and

d) Allowing euthanasia will not lead to consequences but supporters of euthanasia indicate countries such as the Netherlands, Belgium and U.S states like Oregon that have legalized euthanasia to justify its innocence.

Euthanasia and Religion


Numerous arguments also rely on religious beliefs. Many Christians believe that taking a life is a sin and that no one should be interfering with God’s plan for everyone. The most conventional of Christians are even against passive euthanasia. Other religious groups dispute the other side of the argument and believe drugs that help in ending suffering faster are God-given and should be administered after one’s consent. I personally believe that the euthanasia debate is commonly being discussed with religion. The world is a place with many people who have different beliefs and values. Religion is predominantly the main argument anti-euthanasia activists refer to for guidance and answers. My personal belief regarding the matter is the same as most Christians which is that God has a plan for everyone and we should not interfere. Some would raise the argument of personal experience involving a loved one being in pain and not being able to do anything. I personally would not know what I would do in that situation. These are tough decisions to make and I hope I never have to make any of them in my lifetime.      

A major group who are involved with the euthanasia debate are physicians. A survey conducted in the United States recorded the opinions of over 10,000 medical doctors and found that a mere 16% would consider stopping life support with the approval of the family or the patient. An encouraging 55% would never do such. The study also found that a surprising 46 % of doctors believed that physician assisted suicide should be acceptable in some cases. These percentages shocked me and made me proud. The fact that 16% of doctors would take patients off life support and 46% have no interjection with physician assisted suicide is mind boggling. The dispute regarding euthanasia is a growing social issue which involves religion, social and medical sciences. Euthanasia is a well-known field in modern bioethics and this reassures me that multiple studies will be conducted throughout the years to help educate others and the best method of reporting it. 



References

1. http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_96h02_e.htm

2. Health Care Consent Act, 1996 http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca

3. Health Care Consent Act, 1996 http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca

4. Whiting, Raymond (2002), A Natural Right to Die: Twenty-Three Centuries of Debate, Westport, Connecticut

5. Kluge, Eike-Henner W. (2000), "“Assisted Suicide, Ethics and the Law: The Implication of Autonomy and Respect for Persons, Equality and Justice, and Beneficence.”", in Prado, C.G., Assisted Suicide: Canadian Perspectives, Ottawa, Canada: University of Ottawa Press, p. 83

Sunday, 20 October 2013

Introduction

Hello Bloggers,

Welcome to my euthanasia blog where you will learn about assisted suicide, legal cases surrounding the matter and its global impact.

Euthanasia is known as the termination of a person's life in order to relieve them of their suffering. Euthanasia is only performed on people that have a severe condition. Euthanasia has a variety of methods including voluntary, non-voluntary, or involuntary. Voluntary euthanasia is permitted in certain countries and U.S. states. Non-voluntary euthanasia is prohibited in all countries. Involuntary euthanasia is generally considered murder. The issue has been at the centre of many heated debates for years and is surrounded by religious, ethical and practical considerations. As of 2006, euthanasia is the most active area of research in modern bioethics.