Is the categorical denial of pentobarbital for assisted suicide a violation of the constitutional right to a self-determined death in Germany?

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q1 LAW
Kerstin Braun
{"title":"Is the categorical denial of pentobarbital for assisted suicide a violation of the constitutional right to a self-determined death in Germany?","authors":"Kerstin Braun","doi":"10.1093/medlaw/fwaf033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Aiding in suicide is no criminal offence under German law. In addition, a constitutional right to a self-determined death exists, including relying on third-party assistance, where offered. To exercise such a constitutional right, persons require access to effective lethal medication. Pentobarbital is a substance commonly used in jurisdictions allowing assisted dying. Yet, in Germany, the Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices, based on the Narcotic Drugs Act, categorically rejects pentobarbital licence applications with the consequence that pentobarbital is not available in Germany for assisted suicide purposes. Persons wanting to die must either rely on other, frequently less effective drugs or find a medical practitioner willing to set up an intravenous infusion with a lethal substance. This may prove difficult in practice. Several unsuccessful applicants have therefore challenged these licence rejections, but administrative courts have generally upheld the Federal Institute's decisions. This article examines whether the section in the Narcotic Drugs Act, which in its current interpretation prevents access to pentobarbital, is constitutional. It analyses whether this restriction disproportionately limits the constitutional right to a self-determined death of licence applicants and concludes that, due to its severe impact on persons wishing to die, serious doubts arise regarding the section's constitutionality.</p>","PeriodicalId":49146,"journal":{"name":"Medical Law Review","volume":"33 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/medlaw/fwaf033","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aiding in suicide is no criminal offence under German law. In addition, a constitutional right to a self-determined death exists, including relying on third-party assistance, where offered. To exercise such a constitutional right, persons require access to effective lethal medication. Pentobarbital is a substance commonly used in jurisdictions allowing assisted dying. Yet, in Germany, the Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices, based on the Narcotic Drugs Act, categorically rejects pentobarbital licence applications with the consequence that pentobarbital is not available in Germany for assisted suicide purposes. Persons wanting to die must either rely on other, frequently less effective drugs or find a medical practitioner willing to set up an intravenous infusion with a lethal substance. This may prove difficult in practice. Several unsuccessful applicants have therefore challenged these licence rejections, but administrative courts have generally upheld the Federal Institute's decisions. This article examines whether the section in the Narcotic Drugs Act, which in its current interpretation prevents access to pentobarbital, is constitutional. It analyses whether this restriction disproportionately limits the constitutional right to a self-determined death of licence applicants and concludes that, due to its severe impact on persons wishing to die, serious doubts arise regarding the section's constitutionality.

在德国,明确否认戊巴比妥用于协助自杀是否违反了宪法规定的自主死亡权利?
根据德国法律,协助自杀不是刑事犯罪。此外,宪法规定有自行决定死亡的权利,包括在提供援助时依赖第三方援助。为了行使这一宪法权利,人们需要获得有效的致命药物。戊巴比妥是一种在允许协助死亡的司法管辖区常用的物质。然而,在德国,联邦药品和医疗器械研究所根据《麻醉药品法》断然拒绝戊巴比妥许可证申请,其结果是,德国不能提供戊巴比妥用于协助自杀目的。想要死亡的人要么依赖其他通常效果较差的药物,要么找一位愿意静脉注射致命物质的医生。这在实践中可能会很困难。因此,一些不成功的申请人对这些许可证拒绝提出质疑,但行政法院一般维持联邦研究所的决定。本文探讨《麻醉药品法》(Narcotic Drugs Act)中禁止使用戊巴比妥的部分是否符合宪法。它分析了这一限制是否不成比例地限制了许可证申请人自行决定死亡的宪法权利,并得出结论认为,由于其对希望死亡的人的严重影响,对该条的合宪性产生了严重怀疑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Medical Law Review
Medical Law Review MEDICAL ETHICS-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
11.80%
发文量
50
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Medical Law Review is established as an authoritative source of reference for academics, lawyers, legal and medical practitioners, law students, and anyone interested in healthcare and the law. The journal presents articles of international interest which provide thorough analyses and comment on the wide range of topical issues that are fundamental to this expanding area of law. In addition, commentary sections provide in depth explorations of topical aspects of the field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信