Live self-determined, die self-determined - that is the main argument for many advocates of euthanasia. Then set what types of euthanasia there are and what the legal framework looks like at this point.
Sliding into the realm of dreams healthy in old age and not waking up again - the idea of dying becomes reality for just a few. Often, dying drags on and can come with pain and drastic limitations in one's standard of living. Finally, many dying people do not want their neighborhoods to become "a burden". All of this stirs up fears and awakens the desire among some to also determine the moment of death - if necessary with the help of outsiders.
Click on Read more, there is the Video
What is euthanasia?
Can you help someone die? This is a question often discussed, one that ethicists, for even they legislatures, have always grappled with. Basically, different forms of euthanasia are defined:
Passive euthanasia
In this case, life-prolonging measures (e.g. artificial nutrition, ventilation or the administration of certain life-sustaining drugs) are not continued. The foundation for this is mostly the express will of the patient, for example in the form of a living will. If this is the case, passive euthanasia is not punishable in Germany.
Indirect euthanasia
This means, for example, that they provide painkillers or sedatives that alleviate suffering, but at the same time limit life expectancy. An example are opiates, they take away pain and anxiety, but at the same time they themselves dampen breathing. As a result, death often occurs beforehand, because bare measures to alleviate suffering - a circumstance that is accepted. This indirect euthanasia is permitted in Germany, as long as the patient expressly requests this or that (e.g. by means of a living will).
Assisted suicide (assisted suicide)
A suicide - for example by a poison cocktail - is not legally punished. From a purely legal point of view, even helping with the suicide is not punishable. For a long time, it was lawful for doctors that this and that were obliged to save a suicidal person from behind the driveway of the unconscious. With a decision of July 3, 2019, the BGH abolished this clause. If a patient asks his doctor not to treat him after taking deadly drugs, the doctor does not have to save him.
On February 26, 2020, the Federal Constitutional Court completely overturned the controversial euthanasia paragraph 217, which makes organized euthanasia a punishment. This did not presuppose any financial interests, but aimed at repeated euthanasia. This and that, along with circumstances, even affected general practitioners.
After the paragraph was deleted, doctors were allowed to support the suicide of patients without atonement. That goes for even them, prescribing or delivering deadly drugs. However, they do not have permission to be administered to the person who is ready to die, he must take this and that autocephalously.
Active euthanasia
It is itself called "killing on demand" and is punishable in Germany - even in the further course of Chapter 217 was overturned. What is meant is that it is not the person concerned who ingests a deadly medium, but rather that an outsider administers it to him.
For example, if this third party injects the striving person with a medium that kills him or her by design, this is because active euthanasia – both himself and the dying person declared that they needed it. Anyone who then becomes guilty must reckon with imprisonment from 6 months to five years.
Discussion point: assisted suicide
It was a historic decision that the Federal Constitutional Court made on February 26, 2020: Everyone has the right to die of their own choosing. This even includes the right to have third parties help you with your work. All people can make use of this claim to the aids to suicide – not those who are already seriously ill at the end of their lives.
This contradicted what the legislature had decided in 2015, namely a comprehensive information block for all euthanasia services. No one should draw commercial purposeful activity from the plight and death of other people, if they have good intentions.
What was intended as a roadblock, especially for organizations, because of dignity, but mainly unsettled those affected and doctors. Because it is based on the legal regulations and does not refer to financial interests and greed for profit. Rather, in the following everyone makes themselves liable to prosecution, the suicide assistance evenly and again l.
Eats This affected family doctors themselves, who again supported the suicide of their patients.
For opponents of euthanasia, however, the court verdict was a heavy blow - some feared a "normalization" of suicide.
Finding help for the suicide is currently difficult
In fact, in the current building site for people who wish to die, it is often very difficult to find a doctor in the doctor's office who will prescribe deadly drugs, although this is allowed. Many are currently going abroad, for example to Switzerland, where there are euthanasia organizations. However, one must be able to travel and apart from that they have to be able to raise high expenses for it.
New bills rejected
On July 6, 2023, two new draft laws for a regulation were submitted to the Bundestag. Both were rejected.
Protection from external compression and wrong decisions: The first, submitted by a crowd like Lars Castellucci (SPD), put the focus on the protection of the willing to die from external compression and hasty decisions in personal crisis situations. For this purpose, the legal situation should be tightened again, and commercial euthanasia should be prohibited again in accordance with Chapter 217. However, assisted suicide should remain unpunished after an appropriate specialist medical examination. In accordance with the law, this should have been done twice with an interval of at least three months.
Respect for self-determination: The second draft, submitted by a group of Renate Künast (Greens) and Katrin Helling-Plahr (FDP), placed the focus on people's free choice and on it themselves impunity for help with suicide through appropriate organizations. Even then, there should be mandatory and even one-off consultations. However, the plan was to organize it as a low-threshold campaign price atomically nationwide surveying network.
In the open-ended supervision, free will should be checked, but possible alternatives to suicide should be discussed and, if necessary, offers of help for a better life should be communicated.
After the refusal of the drafts, a legal clause is being sought again to implement the 2020 verdict in the doctor's office.
Dieser Text entspricht den Vorgaben der ärztlichen Fachliteratur, medizinischen Leitlinien sowie aktuellen Studien und wurde von Medizinern geprüft.
