My deepest gratitude goes to Prof. Dr. Andreas Voßkuhle. The best judge Germany ever had. He was the head of the German highest court which made this decision in February 2020. (Now is someone else the head from the highest court.) He listened to severly ill people with empathy and understanding. He listened to their stories and made the only reasonable decision which could be made. Fuck all the polticians who try to stop the implementation of new assisted suicide laws. Conservative-religious hope they can wait long enough, maybe the highest court will change its opinion in the future. I think this is a despicable view on it shame on you Jens Spahn. (former health secretary from Germany)
NOT ONLY OLD AND ILL PEOPLE HAVE THE RIGHT TO DIE. EVERYONE WHO WANTS TO DIE HAS THE RIGHT TO SEARCH FOR HELP FROM A DOCTOR CONCERNING ASSISTED SUICIDE.
(This is my translation from a German news article. MAybe it is not perfect.) (Vor einem Jahr stand der 2. Senat unter Ex-Präsident Andreas Voßkuhle in einem Aufsehen erregenden Urteil jedem - nicht nur kranken oder alten Menschen - das Recht zu, aus dem Leben zu scheiden. Und: Jeder Sterbewillige habe hierbei die Freiheit, sich ärztliche Hilfe zu suchen.)
I could talk more about very good reasoning from this judgment but it was a long time I read them. I don't want to spread misinformation. But it was something like: The right to self-determination is more important than the off-chance someone would hypothetically regret his/her decision after one's death.
1. a) As an expression of personal autonomy, the general right of personality (Art. 2(1) in conjunction with Art. 1(1) of the Basic Law) encompasses a right to a self-determined death.
b) The right to a self-determined death includes the freedom to take one's own life. Where an individual decides to end their own life, having reached this decision based on how they personally define quality of life and a meaningful existence, their decision must, in principle, be respected by state and society as an act of personal autonomy and self-determination.
c) The freedom to take one's own life also encompasses the freedom to seek and, if offered, make use of assistance provided by third parties for this purpose.
2. Even state measures that only have indirect or factual effects can amount to impairments of fundamental rights and thus require constitutional justification. The criminalisation of assisted suicide services in § 217(1) of the Criminal Code renders it de facto impossible for persons wanting to commit suicide to make use of assisted suicide services as their chosen form of suicide.
3. a) The prohibition of assisted suicide services must be measured against the standard of strict proportionality.
b) When reviewing whether the provision in question is reasonable (zumutbar ), it must be taken into account that suicide assistance is subject to various conflicting protections under constitutional law. Respect for the fundamental right to self-determination, encompassing self-determination in decisions regarding the end of one's life, of a person making the free and voluntary decision to end their life and seeking assistance to this end collides with the state's duty to protect the autonomy of persons wanting to commit suicide and, additionally, its duty to protect life, a legal interest of high standing.
4. The high standing the Constitution accords to autonomy and life can in principle justify effective preventive protection of these interests, including by means of criminal law. If the legal order criminalises certain forms of suicide assistance that jeopardise personal autonomy, it must ensure that suicide assistance provided voluntarily can in practice still be accessed in the individual case.
5. The prohibition of assisted suicide services in § 217(1) of the Criminal Code reduces the options for assisted suicide to such an extent that there is de facto no scope for the individual to exercise their constitutionally protected freedom.
6. No one can ever be obliged to assist in another person's suicide.
www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de
NOT ONLY OLD AND ILL PEOPLE HAVE THE RIGHT TO DIE. EVERYONE WHO WANTS TO DIE HAS THE RIGHT TO SEARCH FOR HELP FROM A DOCTOR CONCERNING ASSISTED SUICIDE.
(This is my translation from a German news article. MAybe it is not perfect.) (Vor einem Jahr stand der 2. Senat unter Ex-Präsident Andreas Voßkuhle in einem Aufsehen erregenden Urteil jedem - nicht nur kranken oder alten Menschen - das Recht zu, aus dem Leben zu scheiden. Und: Jeder Sterbewillige habe hierbei die Freiheit, sich ärztliche Hilfe zu suchen.)
I could talk more about very good reasoning from this judgment but it was a long time I read them. I don't want to spread misinformation. But it was something like: The right to self-determination is more important than the off-chance someone would hypothetically regret his/her decision after one's death.
1. a) As an expression of personal autonomy, the general right of personality (Art. 2(1) in conjunction with Art. 1(1) of the Basic Law) encompasses a right to a self-determined death.
b) The right to a self-determined death includes the freedom to take one's own life. Where an individual decides to end their own life, having reached this decision based on how they personally define quality of life and a meaningful existence, their decision must, in principle, be respected by state and society as an act of personal autonomy and self-determination.
c) The freedom to take one's own life also encompasses the freedom to seek and, if offered, make use of assistance provided by third parties for this purpose.
2. Even state measures that only have indirect or factual effects can amount to impairments of fundamental rights and thus require constitutional justification. The criminalisation of assisted suicide services in § 217(1) of the Criminal Code renders it de facto impossible for persons wanting to commit suicide to make use of assisted suicide services as their chosen form of suicide.
3. a) The prohibition of assisted suicide services must be measured against the standard of strict proportionality.
b) When reviewing whether the provision in question is reasonable (zumutbar ), it must be taken into account that suicide assistance is subject to various conflicting protections under constitutional law. Respect for the fundamental right to self-determination, encompassing self-determination in decisions regarding the end of one's life, of a person making the free and voluntary decision to end their life and seeking assistance to this end collides with the state's duty to protect the autonomy of persons wanting to commit suicide and, additionally, its duty to protect life, a legal interest of high standing.
4. The high standing the Constitution accords to autonomy and life can in principle justify effective preventive protection of these interests, including by means of criminal law. If the legal order criminalises certain forms of suicide assistance that jeopardise personal autonomy, it must ensure that suicide assistance provided voluntarily can in practice still be accessed in the individual case.
5. The prohibition of assisted suicide services in § 217(1) of the Criminal Code reduces the options for assisted suicide to such an extent that there is de facto no scope for the individual to exercise their constitutionally protected freedom.
6. No one can ever be obliged to assist in another person's suicide.
Judgment of 26 February 2020
Criminalisation of assisted suicide services unconstitutional
www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de
Last edited:
