Suffering in the courtroom: selected contexts regarding the human right to a dignified death from the perspective of national social discussions and international judicial decisions

Abstract

Discussion of the legal and ethical contexts of euthanasia inevitably constitutes a specific and emotional element of the public debate. As part of the ongoing disputes, we observe the confusion in many areas, arguments and scientific perspectives. We perceive the ethical and theological contexts that touch upon the theme of good and evil. We hear about numerous legal disputes. How to construct regulations concerning the end of human life? From time to time also doctors try to discern: what is the line between helping the patient and harming his health and life? These debates appear both in the national media and in international key decision-making bodies. How to objectively make a decision about the continuation of the life of a suffering person? Do we have the tools to decide which course is better for him? How to realize the human right to life at a time when this life is the source of the greatest suffering? Can taking someone’s life be considered a realization of their right to professional medical care? Perhaps all of these emotional discussions are based on a lack of knowledge? Perhaps we are still not able to accurately characterize the specific clinical conditions of the patient in discussions that show the difference between euthanasia and the end of persistent therapy? These doubts arise not only - as mentioned - in local, national disputes. We can also see them in subsequent cases conducted by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). The considerations proposed below are intended to answer the doubts presented. This activity will take place through the presentation of key, socially significant cassuses, important judgments of the ECtHR, and an analysis of the situation that is outlined in these contexts in the subject of euthanasia.