King's College London, Strand, WC2R 2LS, London, UK.
J Bioeth Inq. 2021 Mar;18(1):165-175. doi: 10.1007/s11673-020-10084-x. Epub 2021 Jan 15.
Amongst other countries, the Netherlands currently allows euthanasia, provided the physician performing the procedure adheres to a strict set of requirements. In 2016, Second Chamber member Pia Dijkstra submitted a law proposal which would also allow euthanasia without the reason necessarily having any medical foundation; euthanasia on the basis of a completed life. The debate on this topic has been ongoing for over two decades, but this law proposal has made the discussion much more immediate and concrete. This paper considers the moral permissibility of Pia Dijkstra's law proposal, focusing on the ethics of the implementation Dijkstra describes in her proposal. I argue that, at present, Dijkstra's law proposal is unsuitable for implementation, due to a number of as of yet unaddressed problems, including the possible development of an ageist stigma and undue pressure on the profession of end-of-life coordinator. Perhaps adequate responses can be conceived to address these issues. However, the existence of a radically different, yet currently equally unacceptable position regarding the implementation of euthanasia for a completed life as proposed by fellow party member Paul Schnabel suggests it may be difficult to formulate an ethically acceptable implementation for this, in principle, ethically acceptable concept.
在其他国家中，荷兰目前允许安乐死，只要执行该程序的医生遵守严格的要求。2016 年，第二议院议员 Pia Dijkstra 提交了一项法律提案，该提案也将允许在没有必要的医疗依据的情况下实施安乐死；基于完成的生命实施安乐死。关于这个话题的辩论已经持续了二十多年，但这项法律提案使讨论更加直接和具体。本文考虑了 Pia Dijkstra 法律提案的道德可允许性，重点关注她在提案中描述的实施伦理。我认为，由于目前尚未解决的一些问题，包括可能出现的年龄歧视污名和对临终协调员职业的不当压力，Dijkstra 的法律提案目前不适合实施。也许可以想出足够的应对措施来解决这些问题。然而，由于党内成员 Paul Schnabel 提出的另一种截然不同但目前同样不可接受的关于完成生命的安乐死实施的立场，对于这个原则上在伦理上可以接受的概念，很难制定出在伦理上可以接受的实施方法。
