Abstract

In 2002, the Dutch Euthanasia Act was put in place to regulate the ending of one’s life, permitting a physician to provide assistance in dying to a patient whose suffering the physician assesses as unbearable. Currently, a debate in the Netherlands concerns whether healthy (older) people who value their life as completed should have access to assistance in dying based on their autonomous decision making. Although in European law a right to self-determination ensues from everyone’s right to private life, the Dutch Supreme Court recently adopted a position on whether the Dutch Euthanasia Act lacks adequate attention to a patient’s autonomous decision making. Specifically, in the Albert Heringa case, the Court ruled that the patient–physician relationship as understood in the Dutch Euthanasia Act limits this plea for more self-determination. This ethical analysis of the Heringa case examines how the Supreme Court’s understanding of the Euthanasia Act defines patient autonomy within a reciprocal patient–physician relationship.

摘要

2002 年，制定了《荷兰安乐死法》，以规范一个人的生命终结，允许医生为被医生评估为无法忍受痛苦的患者提供死亡帮助。目前，荷兰的一场辩论涉及健康（年长）的人是否应该根据他们的自主决策获得死亡援助。尽管在欧洲法律中，自决权源于每个人的私人生活权，但荷兰最高法院最近就荷兰安乐死法是否对患者的自主决策缺乏足够的关注采取了立场。具体来说，在Albert Heringa在此案中，法院裁定，《荷兰安乐死法》中所理解的医患关系限制了这种要求更多自决的请求。对Heringa案的伦理分析考察了最高法院对安乐死法案的理解如何在互惠的医患关系中定义患者自主权。