Citation

Sahm S. Zeitschrift fur Medizinische Ethik 2016; 62(3): 219-233.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2016)

DOI

10.14623/zfme.2016.3.219-233

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

In Germany a law regulating businesslike assistance in suicide had been enacted. The law forbids institutionalized assistance, i.e. assistance intended to be carried out repeatedly, e. g. such as offered by respective organizations. An extensive public debate preceded the decision. Yet, after the bill had been passed, critics argued that the new law is criminalizing medical acts which are part of good medical practice in palliative medicine, and, thus, prohibiting physicians to offer appropriate care. Moreover, some critics announced to challenge the constitutionality of the law. Hence, the hypothesis of criminalization deserves careful examination. This paper offers an analysis of the hypothesis and will show that it is based on two misleading elements: i: a flawed classification of the normative structure of accepted medical acts at the end of life; ii: an inappropriate reduction of medical acts to superficially observing facts, thereby ignoring established judicial principles such as social adequacy of acts, and disregarding the elaborated normative assignment of medical interventions in German jurisdiction. In conclusion, the hypothesis of criminalization of medical acts in palliative care by the new law is rejected. It will be shown that there is no difference between medical acts at the end of life and other medical interventions with respect to their normative justification. © 2016 Schwabenverlag AG.

Language: de

Keywords

Businesslike assistance in suicide; criminalization; palliative medicine