Florijn analyzes the ruling of the Court of Appeal in the Heringa case, focusing on the role of patient autonomy in physician assisted death (Florijn 2022). His analysis of the case shows that in Dutch euthanasia law patient autonomy as self-determination is limited by the reciprocal physician-patient relationship. Yet, it also gives an unbalanced view of the Dutch euthanasia regulation and its ethical foundation. By focusing on patient autonomy, the importance of unbearable and irremediable suffering as a prerequisite for euthanasia (...) becomes less visible. The requirement of irremediable suffering means that only a physician is allowed to perform euthanasia, since medical expertise is needed to establish whether there are still treatment options to alleviate suffering. We will discuss the importance of suffering, and its consequences for the “tired of life” debate. (shrink)

In the Netherlands, the legalization of assisted suicide for persons with a death wish without severe illness, often referred to as persons with “completed life” or “tiredness of life,” is intensel...

The target article describes a Dutch case that happened in 2008, where Albert Heringa helped his 98-year-old mother, whose general practitioner rejected her request for an assisted d...

The two target articles in this issue bring into focus the struggle for governance over biomedical interventions that may offer some families more agency—the capacity to act—in the context of many...

Florijn’s helpful discussion of the Heringa case illustrates the difficulties in drawing a boundary on eligibility conditions for EAS. In Heringa, the Dutch Supreme Court reaffirmed...

With appreciation toward those who commented and provided insight on “From reciprocity to autonomy in physician assisted death: an ethical analysis of the Dutch Supreme Court ruling in the Albert H...

In several jurisdictions, irremediable suffering from a medical condition is a legal requirement for access to assisted dying. According to the expressivist objection, allowing assisted dying for a specific group of persons, such as those with irremediable medical conditions, expresses the judgment that their lives are not worth living. While the expressivist objection has often been used to argue that assisted dying should not be legalised, I show that there is an alternative solution available to its proponents. An autonomy-based approach (...) to assisted suicide regards the provision of assisted suicide (but not euthanasia) as justified when it is autonomously requested by a person, irrespective of whether this is in her best interests. Such an approach has been put forward by a recent judgment of the German Federal Constitutional Court, which understands assisted suicide as an expression of the person’s right to a self-determined death. It does not allow for beneficence-based restrictions regarding the person’s suffering or medical diagnosis and therefore avoids the expressivist objection. I argue that on an autonomy-based approach, assisted suicide should not be understood as a medical procedure but rather as the person’s autonomous action. (shrink)

In his carefully documented article, “From reciprocity to autonomy in physician-assisted death: an ethical analysis of the Dutch Supreme Court ruling in the Albert Heringa case,” Berand Florijn (20...