Passive euthanasia and living will

This article deals with the notional distinction between murder of first degree and passive euthanasia. In Hungary, active euthanasia is considered to be a murder of first degree, whilst the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxemburg and Switzerland have legalized the active form of mercy killing in Europe. The palliative terminal medicine, when e.g. giving pain-killer morphin to the patient, might result in shrinking the patient’s life-span, and thus causing indirect euthanasia. However, the legal institution of living will exists in several counter-euthanasia countries. The living will allows future patients to express their decision in advance to refuse a life-sustaining treatment, e.g. in case of irreversible coma. The institution of living will exists in Germany and in Hungary too. Nevertheless, the formal criteria of living will make it hardly applicable. The patient ought to express his/her will before notary in advance, and he/she should hand it over when being hospitalized. If the patient is not able to present his/her living will to his/her doctor in the hospital, then his/her only hope remains that he/she has given a copy of the living will to the family doctor previously, and the family doctor notifies the hospital. Orv. Hetil., 2014, 155(27), 1057–1062.

Download Full-text

Euthanasia outside Europe

Orvosi Hetilap ◽

10.1556/oh.2014.29978 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 155 (32) ◽

pp. 1259-1264 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Máté Julesz

Keyword(s):

The Netherlands ◽

Healthcare Worker ◽

Assisted Suicide ◽

Active Form ◽

Terminally Ill ◽

Legal Institution ◽

Active Euthanasia ◽

Member States ◽

First Case ◽

The Difference

The passive form of euthanasia is legalized almost in every civilized country. Its active form is not a generally accepted legal institution. In Europe, active euthanasia is legalized only in The Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg and Switzerland. In Australia, the Act on the Rights of the Terminally Ill of 1995 legalized the institution of assisted suicide, which is not identical to active euthanasia. The difference lies in the fact that legalized active euthanasia means that the author of a murder is not punishable (under certain circumstances), whilst assisted suicide is not about murder, rather about suicide. In the first case, the patient is killed on his or her request by someone else. In the second case, the patient himself or herself executes the act of self-killing (by the assistance of a healthcare worker). In Australia, the institution of assisted suicide was repealed in 1997. Assisted suicide is legal in four USA member states: in Vermont, Washington, Montana and Oregon. In Uruguay, the active form of euthanasia has been legal since 1932. Orv. Hetil., 2014, 155(32), 1259–1264.

Download Full-text

Euthanasia Formulation Policy in Indonesia's Criminal Legislation and Implications for Patient Life

International Journal of Social Science and Human Research ◽

10.47191/ijsshr/v4-i5-31 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 04 (05) ◽

Author(s):

Indira Inggi Aswijati ◽

Keyword(s):

Criminal Code ◽

Active Euthanasia ◽

Passive Euthanasia ◽

Mercy Killing ◽

The Gift ◽

The Law ◽

Criminal Legislation

No religion is recognized in Indonesia that allows euthanasia to be carried out. Because indeed an action in English called mercy killing or murder based on mercy can also be said to be contradictory to its name, where in carrying out the manifestation of mercy it is precisely what is done is to take the life of man, the gift of the Almighty and should be respected and guarded. Formulation of Article 344 of the Criminal Code concerning euthanasia has a weakness, among others: The existence of elements: at the request of the person himself expressed with sincerity, which makes it difficult to prove and prosecute. Article 344 of the Criminal Code is about active euthanasia, whereas the law of passive euthanasia is not regulated. Delict euthanasia is an ordinary offense, and is not an offense, so it is demanded the tenacity and sharpness of the investigating apparatus and investigators to reveal whether an act of euthanasia has been committed.

Download Full-text

The “Right to Die” (DRAFT)

10.1093/med/9780199313945.003.0005 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Robert C. Macauley

Keyword(s):

Medical Treatment ◽

End Of Life ◽

Pain Medication ◽

Palliative Sedation ◽

Patient Rights ◽

Right To Die ◽

Active Euthanasia ◽

Passive Euthanasia ◽

Life Sustaining Treatment ◽

The Right

Formerly referred to as “passive euthanasia,” forgoing life-sustaining medical treatment came to be accepted in the 1970s based on a patient’s right to privacy. In order to achieve this societal shift, the practice was clearly distinguished from active euthanasia, which was universally rejected. Over the ensuing decades, other permutations of “the right to die”—including receiving intensive pain medication at the end of life and palliative sedation—were considered and accepted to varying degrees. Modern advocates of euthanasia now argue that it is not, in fact, so different from forgoing life-sustaining medical treatment, which endangers the critical consensus that lies at the heart of the patient rights movement. Voluntarily stopping eating and drinking is also discussed, as well as the ethical equivalence of withdrawing and withholding life-sustaining treatment.

Download Full-text

'EUTHANASIA': AN ACT OF PERFORMANCE UNDER THE PURVIEW OF ETHICAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL ASPECTS

10.36106/ijar/4815567 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 76-79

Author(s):

Swarnali Mukhopadhyay

Keyword(s):

Life Support ◽

Terminally Ill ◽

Active Euthanasia ◽

Passive Euthanasia ◽

Mercy Killing ◽

The World ◽

Withdraw Life Support ◽

The Subject ◽

Legal Guidelines

'Euthanasia' is the most debatable issue and has been a burning topic all over the world. The word 'Euthanasia' has been derived from Greek word 'Eu' means 'goodly' or 'well' and 'Thanatos' means 'death'. The lexicographical meaning of the word 'Euthanasia' is 'mercy killing' in which the intentional termination of the life of a terminally ill person is carried out by the assistance of another person. It is a process of carrying out a gentle and easy death of a terminally ill person when his death is desired to free him from his terribly painful life. 'Euthanasia' generally can happen in two ways – i. Passive Euthanasia and ii. Active Euthanasia. In Passive Euthanasia, the treating doctors withdraw life-support machines or withhold any further treatment to shorten the life of a dying person. In Active Euthanasia, the treating doctors apply overdose of painkillers or some other medications to quicken the death of a dying person. Some countries have legalized passive and some have legalized active euthanasia under certain legal guidelines. In this article, the subject of euthanasia has primarily been discussed from the perspective of its righteousness under the constitutional laws and its enshrinement. I also intended for a debate on the preference of active euthanasia over the passive euthanasia for quickening the death of a terminally ill person.

Download Full-text

Attitudes of Physicians on Disclosing Information to and Maintaining Life for Terminal Patients

OMEGA - Journal of Death and Dying ◽

10.2190/7tn6-dutc-f6xq-pff8 ◽

1979 ◽

Vol 9 (1) ◽

pp. 67-77 ◽

Cited By ~ 16

Author(s):

Raymond G. Carey ◽

Emil J. Posavac

Keyword(s):

College Students ◽

Student Nurses ◽

Active Euthanasia ◽

Apparent Contradiction ◽

Passive Euthanasia ◽

Hospital Chaplains ◽

Mercy Killing ◽

Active And Passive Euthanasia ◽

Extraordinary Means ◽

Hospital Sample

Four parallel surveys were made comparing physicians with nurses, hospital chaplains, and a non-hospital sample of college students on their attitudes toward informing terminal patients of their conditions and toward active and passive euthanasia. The present study supports the hypothesis that the apparent contradiction among recent reports on the attitudes of physicians may be due to a shift toward more openness with terminal patients on the part of physicians over the last decade. With respect to sustaining life in terminal patients, there was almost unanimous support for passive euthanasia (i.e. not using extraordinary means) among all four groups of respondents. However, active euthanasia (mercy killing) received majority approval only from student nurses and college students.

Download Full-text

Comparison of attitudes towards five end-of-life care interventions (active pain control, withdrawal of futile life-sustaining treatment, passive euthanasia, active euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide): a multicentred cross-sectional survey of Korean patients with cancer, their family caregivers, physicians and the general Korean population

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2017-020519 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 8 (9) ◽

pp. e020519 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Young Ho Yun ◽

Kyoung-Nam Kim ◽

Jin-Ah Sim ◽

Shin Hye Yoo ◽

Miso Kim ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Family Caregivers ◽

Pain Control ◽

Assisted Suicide ◽

The Other ◽

Active Euthanasia ◽

Physician Assisted Suicide ◽

Passive Euthanasia ◽

Patients With Cancer ◽

Attitudes Towards Death ◽

Life Sustaining Treatment

ObjectivesThis study determined attitudes of four groups—Korean patients with cancer, their family caregivers, physicians and the general Korean population—towards five critical end-of-life (EOL) interventions—active pain control, withdrawal of futile life-sustaining treatment (LST), passive euthanasia, active euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide.Design and settingWe enrolled 1001 patients with cancer and 1006 caregivers from 12 large hospitals in Korea, 1241 members of the general population and 928 physicians from each of the 12 hospitals and the Korean Medical Association. We analysed the associations of demographic factors, attitudes towards death and the important components of a ‘good death’ with critical interventions at EoL care.ResultsAll participant groups strongly favoured active pain control and withdrawal of futile LST but differed in attitudes towards the other four EoL interventions. Physicians (98.9%) favoured passive euthanasia more than the other three groups. Lower proportions of the four groups favoured active euthanasia or PAS. Multiple logistic regression showed that education (adjusted OR (aOR) 1.77, 95% CI 1.33 to 2.36), caregiver role (aOR 1.67, 95% CI 1.34 to 2.08) and considering death as the ending of life (aOR 1.66, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.61) were associated with preference for active pain control. Attitudes towards death, including belief in being remembered (aOR 2.03, 95% CI 1.48 to 2.79) and feeling ‘life was meaningful’ (aOR 2.56, 95% CI 1.58 to 4.15) were both strong correlates of withdrawal of LST with the level of monthly income (aOR 2.56, 95% CI 1.58 to 4.15). Believing ‘freedom from pain’ negatively predicted preference for passive euthanasia (aOR 0.69, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.85). In addition, ‘not being a burden to the family’ was positively related to preferences for active euthanasia (aOR 1.62, 95% CI 1.39 to 1.90) and PAS (aOR 1.61, 95% CI 1.37 to 1.89).ConclusionGroups differed in their attitudes towards the five EoL interventions, and those attitudes were significantly associated with various attitudes towards death.

Download Full-text

Comparative Perspectives on Euthanasia in Nigeria and Ethiopia

African Journal of International and Comparative Law ◽

10.3366/ajicl.2010.0003 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 18 (2) ◽

pp. 170-191 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Anthony O. Nwafor

Keyword(s):

The Netherlands ◽

Criminal Law ◽

Terminally Ill ◽

Hippocratic Oath ◽

Active Euthanasia ◽

Moral Issues ◽

Passive Euthanasia ◽

Judicial Decisions ◽

Pain And Suffering ◽

The Right

Discussions on euthanasia usually revolve around medical, legal and moral issues geared at determining the extent to which a physician may feel obliged to accede to the request of the terminally ill patient to bring to a graceful end his or her pain and suffering by assisting the patient to die. In some jurisdictions, physicians are statutorily conceded such rights in spite of the Hippocratic Oath. But the conservatively religious would have none of such as life is seen as sacred which only the Creator could terminate at the chosen time. This paper examines various views on euthanasia, zeroing in on criminal law regimes of two countries in Africa, namely Nigeria and Ethiopia. It is discovered that while the statutes and judicial decisions in these countries (especially in Nigeria) appear favourably disposed to the idea of passive euthanasia, active euthanasia is still criminalised whatever may be the intention of the doctor, and even at the request of the patient. A strong case is made for the need for these countries to borrow a leaf from some European countries, such as the Netherlands and Belgium, which have legalised euthanasia as a mark of respect to the right of the terminally ill to choose the most honourable way of passage to the Creator while putting an end to unceasing pain and suffering associated with the ailment.

Download Full-text

Euthanasia and Related Practices Worldwide

Crisis ◽

10.1027/0227-5910.19.3.109 ◽

1998 ◽

Vol 19 (3) ◽

pp. 109-115 ◽

Cited By ~ 9

Author(s):

Michael J Kelleher † ◽

Derek Chambers ◽

Paul Corcoran ◽

Helen S Keeley ◽

Eileen Williamson

Keyword(s):

Assisted Suicide ◽

International Association ◽

Active Euthanasia ◽

Physician Assisted Suicide ◽

Passive Euthanasia ◽

Medical Practitioners ◽

General Acceptance ◽

International Importance ◽

Controversial Area ◽

Active And Passive Euthanasia

The present paper examines the occurrence of matters relating to the ending of life, including active euthanasia, which is, technically speaking, illegal worldwide. Interest in this most controversial area is drawn from many varied sources, from legal and medical practitioners to religious and moral ethicists. In some countries, public interest has been mobilized into organizations that attempt to influence legislation relating to euthanasia. Despite the obvious international importance of euthanasia, very little is known about the extent of its practice, whether passive or active, voluntary or involuntary. This examination is based on questionnaires completed by 49 national representatives of the International Association for Suicide Prevention (IASP), dealing with legal and religious aspects of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide, as well as suicide. A dichotomy between the law and medical practices relating to the end of life was uncovered by the results of the survey. In 12 of the 49 countries active euthanasia is said to occur while a general acceptance of passive euthanasia was reported to be widespread. Clearly, definition is crucial in making the distinction between active and passive euthanasia; otherwise, the entire concept may become distorted, and legal acceptance may become more widespread with the effect of broadening the category of individuals to whom euthanasia becomes an available option. The “slippery slope” argument is briefly considered.

Download Full-text