When Termination
Is The Treatment
Supporters of medical homicide often point to legal safeguards as reassurance that vulnerable people will be protected. But the existence of a review process does not settle the deeper question: should intentionally ending a person’s life ever become an accepted answer to their suffering?
Euthanasia and assisted suicide involve real people
who deserve care, protection, and dignity.
In Spain, 25-year-old Noelia Castillo died by euthanasia following a lengthy legal dispute. She had experienced psychiatric illness, sexual assault, and injuries from a suicide attempt that left her legs paralyzed. Her family challenged the approval of her euthanasia request, but the courts ultimately allowed it to proceed. Her case raises difficult questions about how trauma, disability, and mental health are considered when someone requests death.1
In the Netherlands, a physician ended the life of a child who was almost two years old. The child had severe disabilities, extensive brain damage, and difficult-to-treat epilepsy. The parents requested that the physician end their child’s life. The child’s suffering and the family’s heartbreaking circumstances deserve compassion. Yet, the medical review committee’s approval of the murder leaves a fundamental ethical concern: how can a system protect a vulnerable child when the decision to end that child’s life rests entirely on the subjective perception of others about his or her quality of life?2
France’s legalization of euthanasia raises another serious concern: the protection of adults who rely on legal guardians. Under the new law, physicians may euthanize adult patients with legal guardians so long as the physician “consults” with the legal guardian first. However, the guardian cannot veto the physician’s decision and is now powerless to protect the patient. The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition’s executive director, Alex Schadenberg, discussed the new law, saying, “In reality, the euthanasia law in France is still the second most extreme in the world after Canada and is on track to become the most extreme if those pushing its legalization get their way.” He also pointed out, “Europe has not seen such an extreme eugenic law since the fall of Nazi Germany. People with disabilities, in France, need to rise up.”3