Raus Kasper, Vanderhaegen Bert, Sterckx Sigrid
Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.
Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
J Med Philos. 2021 Jan 25;46(1):80-107. doi: 10.1093/jmp/jhaa031.
In 2002 with the passing of the Euthanasia Law, Belgium became one of the few countries worldwide to legalize euthanasia. In the 18 years since the passing of the law, much has changed. We argue that in Belgium a widening of the use of euthanasia is occurring and that this can be ethically and legally problematic. This is in part related to the fact that several legal requirements intended to operate as safeguards and procedural guarantees in reality often fail to operate as such. We focus on three kinds of safeguards or procedural guarantees: (1) the legally defined due care criteria for eligibility for euthanasia; (2) the consultation of a second (and sometimes third) physician; and (3) the reporting of euthanasia cases to the Federal Control and Evaluation Commission for Euthanasia. We will show how each of these three safeguards can exhibit shortcomings in theory and practice.
2002年，随着《安乐死法》的通过，比利时成为全球少数几个将安乐死合法化的国家之一。自该法律通过后的18年里，情况发生了很大变化。我们认为，在比利时，安乐死的使用范围正在扩大，这在伦理和法律上可能存在问题。这部分与以下事实有关：一些旨在作为保障措施和程序保障的法律要求，在现实中往往未能起到这样的作用。我们关注三种保障措施或程序保障：（1）法律规定的安乐死资格应有的谨慎标准；（2）咨询第二位（有时是第三位）医生；（3）向联邦安乐死控制与评估委员会报告安乐死案例。我们将展示这三种保障措施在理论和实践中是如何表现出缺陷的。
