ECHR rules that Belgian euthanasia breached right to life

ECHR rules that Belgian euthanasia breached right to life

On Tuesday, the European Court of Human Rights concluded that Belgium had not adequately investigated the circumstances surrounding Godelieva de Troyer’s 2012 euthanasia for “untreatable depression.”

According to the court, the European Convention on Human Rights’ Article 2—which states that everyone’s right to life will be respected by the law—was broken.

Tom Mortier, de Troyer’s son, presented the historic euthanasia case before the Strasbourg court. She sought the nation’s top proponent of assisted suicide, who finally consented to kill her even though he was a cancer expert, and she passed away in 2012.

Neither her son nor any other family members were contacted prior to her euthanasia at the age of 64.

The practice of euthanasia in Belgium was not ruled to have violated any laws by the Court of Human Rights on October 4.

The verdict concerned the Federal Commission for the Control and Evaluation of Euthanasia in Belgium’s handling of de Troyer’s euthanasia facts and the speed with which a criminal case was brought after de Troyer’s death.

The court concluded that the control mechanism created in this instance did not safeguard the commission’s independence, “considering the essential role played by the commission in the a posteriori supervision of euthanasia.”

The court concluded that both the commission’s lack of independence and the slow pace of the criminal inquiry contributed to Belgium’s failure to uphold its responsibility under Article 2 of the treaty.

De Troyer had donated money to a Belgian group that supported euthanasia over the course of only a few months. Despite the need for separate views in the case of patients who were not anticipated to pass away very soon, he recommended she consult other physicians who were also a member of the same group.

The physician who executed her death sentence is now co-chair of the federal body tasked with later authorizing euthanasia cases.

By a decision of 5-2, the Court of Human Rights determined that the terms of the euthanasia did not violate either Article 2 or the legal framework of Belgium.

Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF International), a Christian legal organization, stated in a statement on October 4 that it “welcomes the court’s judgment of an Article 2 violation, which reveals the inadequacy of’safeguards’ for the purposeful destruction of life.” The ruling refutes the idea that there is a “right to die” and exposes the horrors that would unavoidably occur in society if euthanasia is made legal.

While the court determined that increasing “safeguarding” was a good way to preserve life, ADF International said that the court’s own decision made it evident that laws and procedures were in fact inadequate to guarantee the rights of Mortier’s mother.

Robert Clarke, deputy director of ADF International, who represented Mortier before the court, stated that although it is disappointing that the court rejected the challenge to the Belgian legal system, it should lead to more caution about euthanasia throughout Europe and across the globe.

“The truth is that once a technique is legalized, there are no “safeguards” that can lessen the risks associated with it. Although nothing will bring Tom’s mother back, we hope that this ruling provides Tom with a tiny amount of justice, Clarke added.

Euthanasia and assisted suicide are already available in nations like Belgium and the Netherlands, and medical professionals who personally disagree with the practice are nevertheless required to refer individuals.

In September, Vincent Kemme, the founder of the Belgian bioethics group Biofides, told EWTN News that his group has seen a trend away from the protection of medical professionals’ consciences in recent years, particularly in the poorer nations of Europe.

The advent of relativism and moral subjectivism, according to Kemme, “totally transformed the profession of the doctor in Europe and the United States.”

Euthanasia is legal in Belgium when a serious and incurable problem brought on by an illness or accident cannot be treated, leaving the patient in a continual state of excruciating bodily or mental suffering.


↯↯↯Read More On The Topic On TDPel Media ↯↯↯