Walker-Renshaw Barbara, Finley Margot
Health Law Can. 2016 Feb;36(3):74-9.
In this article, the authors address the question of whether the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in Carter v. Canada leaves open the possibility that persons with severe, treatment-refractory mental illness may lawfully seek a physician-assisted death. If so, how will health care providers distinguish between suicidal ideation and intent that is a symptom of the pathology of a treatable mental illness, on the one hand; and suicidal ideation and intent that is, perhaps, a capable and thoughtful response to a "grievous and irremediable" condition, on the other hand? Mental illness is the most common risk factor for suicide. If physician-assisted death becomes an accepted practice in mental health care, how will that be reconciled with the well-established impetus in mental health care to prevent suicide? The authors consider the competing ethical values of beneficence and promoting patient autonomy, in the context of the recovery movement in mental health care.
在本文中,作者探讨了加拿大最高法院在卡特诉加拿大案中的裁决是否留下了这样一种可能性,即患有严重的、难以治疗的精神疾病的人可能合法地寻求医生协助死亡。如果是这样,医疗保健提供者将如何区分一方面是作为可治疗精神疾病病理症状的自杀意念和意图;另一方面是或许作为对“严重且无法治愈”状况的一种有能力且经过深思熟虑的回应的自杀意念和意图?精神疾病是自杀最常见的风险因素。如果医生协助死亡在精神卫生保健中成为一种被接受的做法,这将如何与精神卫生保健中既定的预防自杀的动力相协调?作者在精神卫生保健康复运动的背景下,考量了行善和促进患者自主这两种相互冲突的伦理价值观。