Revisiting euthanasia: a comparative analysis of a right to die in dignity

• DOI: 10.31235/osf.io/fd896
• Publication Date: 2018-10-16T17:40:59Z
• Authors: Nuno Ferreira
• Keywords: Sterbehilfe; human dignity; K0201; K0520; assisted suicide; bepress|Law|Human Rights Law; statuary regulation; K1; Regulierung; SocArXiv|Law|Criminal Law; SocArXiv|Law|Human Rights Law; SocArXiv|Law|Medical Jurisprudence; 03 medical and health sciences; 0302 clinical medicine; Liberalisierung; liberalization; K5000; Menschenwürde; Euthanasie; regulation; euthanasia; K; 16. Peace & justice; bepress|Law; bepress|Law|Criminal Law; Recht; ddc:340; bepress|Law|Medical Jurisprudence; SocArXiv|Law; K3154; gesetzliche Regelung; Law; K3150

Euthanasia is a practice that has taken place since immemorial times. And since immemorial times it has been controversial and a source of harsh debates. Throughout the last decades, many changes have been introduced in this field and many practices, until then only taking place without public knowledge, were progressively revealed and regulated.This paper aims, firstly, at clarifying the terminology and concepts usually used in the euthanasia debate and presenting, in a lucid way, the arguments that civic movements and authors resort to when defending or criticising the liberalisation of euthanasia. Secondly, it describes the legal and social situation regarding euthanasia in several countries, where cases and legislation have demanded greater awareness from society. Thirdly, it attempts to compare the different national situations previously analysed. Finally, it discusses ways of improving the present situation and finding better solutions for the regulation of euthanasia.In such a debate, where moral, ethic and religious arguments and beliefs are called upon, it is crucial not to lose sight of the foundations of our culture(s) and society(ies). Therefore, this paper, although concentrating on the legal aspects of this debate, tries to take into account of some non-legal aspects which are also relevant and without which it is not possible to thoroughly discuss this issue. Ultimately, this paper does not attempt to portray a neutral position, sinc legal scholars should not necessarily limit themselves to technical and cold analysis of legal provisions.