Thu. Jun 13th, 2024

Oregon assisted suicide: Catholic common good vs. American ideals

By ki0nk May30,2024

Documentation The Catholic opposition to the legality of medical assistance in dying in Oregon has diminished over the course of twenty-six years, with the problem of abortion being the primary focus of their objection.

Having completed “the total,” Dan Diaz had attended a private Catholic school and worked as an altar boy. These days, however, the Californian is more well-known as a media personality in the discussion surrounding end-of-life care. After receiving a diagnosis of an aggressive brain tumor in 2014, when she was 29 years old, his wife Brittany relocated from California to Oregon in order to be eligible for medical help in dying. Dan makes a commitment to his wife while he is lying in bed that he will spend the rest of his life working to ensure that assisted suicide is legalized in other states in the United States.

A limited number of nations and states have passed legislation that legalizes euthanasia, assisted suicide, and sometimes both of these practices. To prevent the abuse and misuse of these procedures, laws and safeguards have been put into place in every jurisdiction throughout the world. These preventative measures have included, among other things, the explicit agreement of the individual who is requesting euthanasia, the mandatory reporting of all cases, the administration of euthanasia only by physicians (with the exception of Switzerland), and consultation with a second physician.

In the present research, information is presented that demonstrates that these laws and protections are routinely disregarded and violated in all of the jurisdictions, and that violations are not prosecuted. As an illustration, approximately 900 individuals are given fatal chemicals on an annual basis without having given their explicit agreement, and in one jurisdiction, nearly half of all instances of euthanasia are carried out without being reported.

The social “slippery slope” is represented by the increased tolerance of violations in cultures that have such laws, as well as by modifications to the laws and criteria that followed the legalization of the illegal activity. Although the original intention was to restrict euthanasia and assisted suicide to a last-ditch choice for a very small number of terminally ill individuals, several countries have since expanded the practice to include babies, children, and people who are suffering from dementia. The need of having a terminal illness is no longer necessary. A person who is “tired of living” and is beyond the age of 70 is now eligible for euthanasia in the Netherlands, which is currently under consideration. Therefore, the legalization of euthanasia and assisted suicide puts a large number of people in danger, has an effect on the values that society holds over time, and does not result in the establishment of restrictions and safeguards.

According to the most common definition, euthanasia is the act of voluntarily ending the life of a person at the request of that person, which can only be carried out by a medical professional 1, 2. Because of this, the physician is the one who gives the poisonous substance. Physician-assisted suicide (pas), on the other hand, is when a person takes a lethal substance that has been prescribed by a physician and then delivers it to themselves.

There are currently three countries that have legalized euthanasia: the Netherlands, Belgium, and Luxembourg 1,2. Both the laws of the Netherlands and the laws of Luxembourg permit the use of pas. Despite the fact that the states of Oregon and Washington in the United States allowed the use of euthanasia in 1997 and 1999, respectively, euthanasia is still considered to be unlawful. 3. The situation in the state of Montana is now unclear; a law that would have legalized pas was approved by the state legislature in 2010, but it was recently defeated by the Senate Judiciary Committee of the state.

Both euthanasia and pas were officially authorized in the Netherlands in the year 2001, following almost thirty years of public debate. a. 1. The Royal Dutch Medical Association, in conjunction with the court system of that country, has been working on developing and modifying guidelines and procedures for conducting and controlling euthanasia since the 1980s. These guidelines and procedures have been updated on multiple occasions. Euthanasia was authorized in Belgium in 2002, following around three years of public conversation that included government committees. This was accomplished despite resistance, including that which came from the Belgian Medical Association.

The cases of the Netherlands and Oregon served as a source of inspiration for the law, and the public was given the assurance that any shortcomings in the Dutch legal system would be rectified in the Belgian jurisdiction. 2009 is the year that Luxembourg made euthanasia and pas lawful. Assisted suicide is permitted in Switzerland, despite the fact that it is not officially legalized. This is due to a loophole in a legislation that decriminalizes suicide, which dates back to the early 1900s. Switzerland is an exception to this rule. Nevertheless, euthanasia is against the law 4. It is permissible for a person to commit suicide with the assistance of another person, provided that the latter does not have any self-serving intentions and does not stand to benefit personally from the individual’s death. In Switzerland, assisted suicide can be done by individuals who are not medical professionals, in contrast to other jurisdictions that require euthanasia or assisted suicide to be accomplished solely by medical professionals.

For the purpose of controlling the practices, ensuring social monitoring, and preventing euthanasia and pas from being exploited or misused, safeguards, criteria, and procedures have been put into place in each and every one of these jurisdictions. The extent to which these controls and safeguards have been able to control the practices and to avoid abuse is something that merits closer inspection, particularly by jurisdictions that are contemplating the legalization of euthanasia and pas. 5. Some criteria and procedures are common across all of the jurisdictions, while others vary from country to country 5,6. An investigation into the efficiency of the safeguards and the phenomena known as the “slippery slope” is presented in this work.—–bulgaria\


By ki0nk

Related Post

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *