The Role of Scientific Evaluations of the Dutch Termination of Life on Request and Assisted Suicide (Review Procedure) Act

2021 ◽  
pp. 63-83
Author(s):  
Agnes van der Heide ◽  
Johan Legemaate ◽  
Johannes (Hans) J. M. van Delden ◽  
Bregje Onwuteaka-Philipsen
2016 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 243-253
Author(s):  
Grzegorz Stefanowicz

This article undertakes to show the way that has led to the statutory decriminalization of euthanasia-related murder and assisted suicide in the Kingdom of the Netherlands. It presents the evolution of the views held by Dutch society on the euthanasia related practice, in the consequence of which death on demand has become legal after less than thirty years. Due attention is paid to the role of organs of public authority in these changes, with a particular emphasis put on the role of the Dutch Parliament – the States General. Because of scarcity of space and limited length of the article, the change in the attitudes toward euthanasia, which has taken place in the Netherlands, is presented in a synthetic way – from the first discussions on admissibility of a euthanasia-related murder carried out in the 1970s, through the practice of killing patients at their request, which was against the law at that time, but with years began more and more acceptable, up to the statutory decriminalization of euthanasia by the Dutch Parliament, made with the support of the majority of society.


2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 395-403 ◽  
Author(s):  
MARTIN BUIJSEN

Abstract:The Dutch Euthanasia Act seems to be set in stone. Since it took effect in 2002, it has not seen any significant amendments. Recent developments, however, indicate that a major component of the act—the review procedure—is due for revision. The review practice of the regional euthanasia review committees—responsible for applying and interpreting the law—now also extends to instances of euthanasia and assisted suicide for special categories of patients: psychiatric patients, patients with early-stage dementia, and patients whose suffering is derived from a combination of medical and existential causes. In this article, it is argued that a reconsideration of the review practice for these new cases is necessary primarily because review committees lack the legitimacy needed for the development of policies with such a large impact on society.


Thomas Szasz ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 55-64
Author(s):  
George J. Annas

Szasz objected to the medicalization of suicide, the legalization of suicide prevention, and especially the coercive role of psychiatry in this realm. He declared that, by medicalizing suicide, we banish the subject from discussion. What is meant by acceptable and unacceptable “suicide”? Who has a right to commit suicide? How does suicide implicate freedom? Does it reflect abortion jurisprudence? How do psychiatrists become suicide’s gatekeepers? Current phenomena (e.g., new physician-assisted suicide legislation) illuminate these and other issues (e.g., euthanasia, informed consent, informed refusal, the “right to die,”), all suggesting how Szasz would react to each. Suicide is legal, but is almost always considered a result of mental illness. Courts approve psychiatrists who want to commit “suicidal” patients involuntarily. Granting physicians prospective legal immunity for prescribing lethal drugs is, at best, a strange and tangential reaction to our inability to discuss suicide (and dying) rationally. Szasz got it right.


1992 ◽  
Vol 17 (01) ◽  
pp. 89-100 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Feldman ◽  
Mark Gould

In a recent issue of this journal (Volume 15, Number 4, Fall 1990), Susan Sterett examined the role of the Law Commission in the development of English administrative law. She suggested that the Commission mimicked a “peak association” and adopted an “idiom of legalism” in order to justify its reform proposals. This comment disagrees with Sterett on three grounds. First, the role and constitutional position of the Commission is far more complex than Sterett suggests, and this affects the way in which the Commission works. Second, judges and academic lawyers were central to the reform of substantive principles of judicial review in the 1960s and 1970s, making it unnecessary for the Law Commission to act in this field. Finally, it is wrong to ignore the fact that much administrative law occurs outside the judicial review procedure.


2007 ◽  
Vol 58 (1) ◽  
pp. 44-52 ◽  
Author(s):  
G.G. van Bruchem-van de Scheur ◽  
Arie J.G. van der Arend ◽  
Cor Spreeuwenberg ◽  
Huda Huijer Abu-Saad ◽  
Ruud H.J. ter Meulen

2019 ◽  

This groundbreaking volume on secular law in Germany brings together scholars on a variety of topics regarding the separation of the state and religion. It conducts in-depth legal analyses dealing with a wide range of recent cases in which the rule of law and the neutral role of the secular state were put at risk by religious politics. The book’s 21 essays cover topics such as human rights, the constitutional roots of the secular state, freedom of belief and non-belief, medically assisted suicide, sexual self-determination, abortion, genital mutilation, criminal prosecution in the Catholic Church’s sex abuse scandal, the collection of church taxes by the state based on baptisms of infants and minors, the collection of special church fees from atheists and Muslims by the state, church labour law, discrimination against members of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster and Islamic veils in state schools. With contributions by editors and authors Dr. Gerhard Czermak | RiBGH Prof. Dr. Ralf Eschelbach | Dr. Carsten Frerk | Prof. Dr. Michael Hassemer | Johann-Albrecht Haupt | Prof. Dr. Rolf Dietrich Herzberg | Prof. Dr. Matthias Franz | Dr. Volker Korndörfer | Prof. Dr. Hartmut Kreß | Ingrid Matthäus-Maier | RA Dr. Till Müller-Heidelberg | Prof. Dr. Reinhard Merkel | RA Ludwig A. Minelli | Dr. Jacqueline Neumann | Prof. Dr. Dres. h.c. Ulfrid Neumann | Prof. Dr. Holm Putzke | RA Dr. Winfried Rath | StaatsMin a.D. Diplom-Jurist Rolf Schwanitz | Prof. Dr. Jörg Scheinfeld | Dr. Michael Schmidt-Salomon | Sarah Willenbacher


2008 ◽  
Vol 17 (12) ◽  
pp. 1618-1626 ◽  
Author(s):  
GG van Bruchem-van de Scheur ◽  
Arie JG van der Arend ◽  
Huda Huijer Abu-Saad ◽  
Frans CB van Wijmen ◽  
Cor Spreeuwenberg ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  

1995 ◽  
Vol 40 (10) ◽  
pp. 593-602 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harvey Max Chochinov ◽  
Keith G Wilson

Objective To review the current status of the euthanasia debate by examining public and physician attitudes towards euthanasia, the practice of euthanasia in the Netherlands, recent developments in Canada and other countries, psychosocial considerations related to the desire for death in terminally inpatients, and the roles that psychiatrists may be asked to play in the event of legislative reform involving decriminalization. Methods A literature review was conducted focusing on recent surveys regarding physician and patient attitudes towards euthanasia, the role of psychiatrists and empirical data pertaining to the mental state of patients who request physician-hastened death. Results Psychiatric morbidity among patients requesting physician-hastened death is considerable. Conclusion As a special case of suicide, euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide are of particular relevance to mental health professionals.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document