Euthanasia in France, Czech Republic and Israel
The public prosecutor of Boulogne-sur-Mer has announced on January 2, 2006, that he did not wish to press charges against the mother and the physician who had caused the death of Vincent Humbert, a young tetraplegic man who had repeatedly asked to be euthanized. In September 2003, Marie Humbert the mother, had given poison to her son. A few days after, Dr. Frédéric Chaussoy, the physician, had interrupted the artificial respirator and gave a lethal injection of potassium chloride to the young man. The mother had announced the day before poisoning her son, her intention to “help [her] son to commit suicide” on the French TV TF1.
The prosecutor found that though the act was “criticizable” considering the circumstances, “both persons acted under the irresistible constraint of exceptional circumstances the nature of which exonerates them from criminal responsibility”. He also insisted that his decision did not mean that the law criminalizing euthanasia was being changed. The medical analyst of the French conservative newspaper, Le Figaro, writing on January 4, found however that his requisitions were “in total contradiction” with existing laws. Read her whole article here .
Nevertheless, in the French judicial system, while the Prosecutor represents the interests of society and requests the opening of judicial investigations, he has no power as to deciding the issue of a judicial instruction (or investigation). Hence the last word remains to the investigating magistrate who may decide that Humbert and Chaussoy should face court regardless of the Prosecution’s requisitions. The judge may also decide to follow the requisitions as happens often in judicial investigations.
Marie Humbert reacted frustrated by what she viewed as the “hypocrisy of justice”, because she said she hoped to use the trial discuss the legalization of euthanasia. “They stole my son’s trial” she said. Since the very mediatized death of her son, Marie Humbert has been an active militant for the legalization of euthanasia in France. The case of Vincent Humbert brought forth a French law adopted in April 2005, allowing patients to request the discontinuation of care in certain cases.
In other euthanasia-related news, Israel’s parliament voted on the 6th of December 2005 to decriminalize the interruption of care to terminal-phase patients after a 6-year debate. Physicians will be able to stop artificial respiration for incurably ill patients or those whose illness is causing too much suffering.
In the meantime, the Czech House of Representatives had adopted on the 30th of November a bill changing the status of euthanasia in its penal code. Euthanasia will remain a crime but will not be considered as a murder in the first degree, but rather as manslaughter and will be punished with 6 years imprisonment against 10 to 15 years previously. The Christian, Jewish and Muslim representatives then published an appeal to the Senate to reject the bill and the President of the Republic to refuse signing the act if it was passed.
The prosecutor found that though the act was “criticizable” considering the circumstances, “both persons acted under the irresistible constraint of exceptional circumstances the nature of which exonerates them from criminal responsibility”. He also insisted that his decision did not mean that the law criminalizing euthanasia was being changed. The medical analyst of the French conservative newspaper, Le Figaro, writing on January 4, found however that his requisitions were “in total contradiction” with existing laws. Read her whole article here .
Nevertheless, in the French judicial system, while the Prosecutor represents the interests of society and requests the opening of judicial investigations, he has no power as to deciding the issue of a judicial instruction (or investigation). Hence the last word remains to the investigating magistrate who may decide that Humbert and Chaussoy should face court regardless of the Prosecution’s requisitions. The judge may also decide to follow the requisitions as happens often in judicial investigations.
Marie Humbert reacted frustrated by what she viewed as the “hypocrisy of justice”, because she said she hoped to use the trial discuss the legalization of euthanasia. “They stole my son’s trial” she said. Since the very mediatized death of her son, Marie Humbert has been an active militant for the legalization of euthanasia in France. The case of Vincent Humbert brought forth a French law adopted in April 2005, allowing patients to request the discontinuation of care in certain cases.
In other euthanasia-related news, Israel’s parliament voted on the 6th of December 2005 to decriminalize the interruption of care to terminal-phase patients after a 6-year debate. Physicians will be able to stop artificial respiration for incurably ill patients or those whose illness is causing too much suffering.
In the meantime, the Czech House of Representatives had adopted on the 30th of November a bill changing the status of euthanasia in its penal code. Euthanasia will remain a crime but will not be considered as a murder in the first degree, but rather as manslaughter and will be punished with 6 years imprisonment against 10 to 15 years previously. The Christian, Jewish and Muslim representatives then published an appeal to the Senate to reject the bill and the President of the Republic to refuse signing the act if it was passed.
posted by dawnofeurope | 9:34 pm
<< Home