Ryan C J
Westmead Hospital, New South Wales.
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 1995 Dec;29(4):580-5. doi: 10.3109/00048679509064970.
The aim of the paper is to determine the role that psychiatrists should play in legislation that establishes a right to active voluntary euthanasia (AVE).
One version of the "slippery slope" argument, usually invoked against the legalisation of AVE, is recast as an argument for the introduction of strong safeguards in any future AVE legislation. The literature surrounding the prevalence of psychiatric illnesses in the terminally ill, physicians' ability to identify such illnesses and the aetiology of suicide in the terminally ill is examined.
The strength of the slippery slope argument, combined with the poor ability of general physicians to diagnose psychiatric illness in the terminally ill, demands that any legislation allowing AVE should require a mandatory psychiatric review of the patient requesting euthanasia.
Any legislation adopted that establishes a right to active voluntary euthanasia should include a mandatory psychiatric review of the person requesting euthanasia and a cooling off period before the request is acceded to. In addition, the discovery of a serious mental illness ought to disqualify the affected person from the right to AVE until that illness resolves.
本文旨在确定精神科医生在确立积极自愿安乐死（AVE）权利的立法中应发挥的作用。
一种通常用于反对AVE合法化的“滑坡”论点，被重新表述为在未来任何AVE立法中引入强有力保障措施的论据。对有关绝症患者精神疾病患病率、医生识别此类疾病的能力以及绝症患者自杀病因的文献进行了研究。
“滑坡”论点的力度，加上普通医生在诊断绝症患者精神疾病方面能力欠佳，要求任何允许AVE的立法都应对请求安乐死的患者进行强制精神科评估。
任何确立积极自愿安乐死权利的立法都应包括对请求安乐死的人进行强制精神科评估，以及在同意请求之前设置冷静期。此外，发现严重精神疾病应使受影响的人丧失AVE权利，直至该疾病痊愈。
