Mercy Killing

Published on March 2017 | Categories: Documents | Downloads: 80 | Comments: 0 | Views: 670
of 21
Download PDF   Embed   Report

Comments

Content

 

Mercy killing: yes, no, and why? w hy?  April 26, 2014 12:03 am •





by  Amado  Amado S. Tolentino Jr.

Possibly the first first in the history of the the Congress of the the Philippines, a voluntary euthanasia or mercy killing and “living will-related” proposal known as Senate Bill o! "##$ or the atural %eath &ct was filed by Senator 'iriam %efensorSantiago! (he bill seeks to recogni)e the fundamental right of adult persons to decide their own health care, including the decision to have life-sustaining treatment withheld or withdrawn in instances of a terminal condition or permanent unconscious condition! *ver the past two decades, an end-of-life policy unfolded +uietly in some parts of the world! n the S, the %eath .ith %ignity &ct /"0012 in *regon allows doctors to write legal prescriptions for terminally ill patients who want to control the time and a nd place of their death! (o +ualify under the law, the patient should be fully conscious and able to administer his own overdose! n 3urope, Belgium is set to be the second country after (he etherlands to allow terminally ill children over "4 years old facing unbearable physical suffering and repeatedly makes the re+uest to be officially killed! Belgium and Swit)erland have legali)ed euthanasia for many years but only for people over  the age of "#! (he etherlands have legali)ed euthanasia for adults and children over "4 years for the past twelve years!

 

'ercy killing or euthanasia was a favorite topic of debate in Philippine law schools during the last fifty years or so! ow that a bill is with the Senate, among many +uestions 5ilipinos wish to be answered to have an in-depth understanding of the sub6ect that will enable them to make an informed yes or  no and why in case of renewed debates, survey or referendum, are7 .hat is euthanasia or mercy killing 8 .hat is the difference between voluntary and involuntary mercy killing 8 .hat is a “living will”8 'ay human life be shortened legally8 Should one kill another in mercy, or is life, however hard too dear to lose8 .hat is the rule in our 6urisdiction on mercy killing and assisted suicide8 s the mercy motive an element of a crime or defense to its e9istence8 *ut of compassion for a suffering patient, must we legali)e euthanasia altogether8 *ut of compassion for the actor, must we mitigate the harshness of formal law under which euthanasia is treated as deliberate killing8 f an individual has the right to live, does he also have the right to die8 f there is a right to privacy, does it include the right to die8 %oes the right to decide one:s health care include the right to decide to end one:s life8 s there a right to kill8 s there a point at which an incurable illness becomes a living death8 f so, is it permissible for someone:s life to be deliberately cut off 8 .hat are the religious, non-religious and medical views about euthanasia8 .hen does human life end8 .hat is “brain death”8 s persistent vegetative state the same as being brain dead8 .hen is a person legally and medically dead8 .hat is an acceptable legal and medical definition of “terminal condition or permanent unconscious condition”8 .ho has the right to make the decision to end life;the patient, the spouse, the parents, the doctor<team of doctors or the courts8 .ho should “pull the plug8” & black hooded e9ecutioner8 (he comple9 life-and-death problems raised by the scientific advances in the field of medicine have no simple answers! ntimately involved in the issues besides physicians and lawyers are theologians, the courts, lawmakers,

 

psychologists, sociologists, ethicists among others! 39pert advice is needed from many fields on this culture-of-life vs! emerging end-of-life policy! 5ormer &mbassador &mado &mado S! (olentino (olentino =r! belongs to P >aw ?@A where his undergraduate thesis was “s there a right to die 8 & study of the law on euthanasia” published by the Philippine >aw =ournal at the height of the comatose aren &nn uinlan case in the S during the early l0$Ds! Ee is a governor of the Philippine &mbassadors 5oundation! fforts to change government policies on euthanasia of human lives in the 4Dth and 4"st centuries have met limited success in  in  .estern countries! countries! Euman euthanasia policies have also been developed by a variety of F*s F*s,, most notably medical associations and advocacy organi)ations! &s of =une 4D"G, human euthanasia is legal only in the  etherlands the etherlands,,Belgium Belgium,, ColombiaH"I and >u9embourg >u9embourg!! &ssisted  &ssisted suicide is suicide is legal in Swit)erland Swit)erland,, Fermany Fermany,, =apan =apan,, &lbania and  &lbania and in the  the S S  states of .ashington, .ashington, *regon *regon,, Jermont Jermont,, ew 'e9ico  and 'e9ico and  'ontana 'ontana!! Euman euthanasia was criminali)ed in 'e9ico 'e9ico,, (hailand (hailand,, and the orthern (erritory of (erritory of &ustralia! Contents hideII    Hhide

" 3uthanasia law by country



o

o

"!" &ust &ustrali ralia a "!4 "! 4 Be Belgi lgium um

o

"!A "! A Ca Canad nada a

o

"!1 Colo Colombi mbia a

o

"!G "! G %e %enma nmark rk

o

"!@ "! @ 5in 5inlan land d

o

"!$ "! $ 5ra 5rance nce

o

"!# "! # n ndia dia

o

"!0 "! 0 re relan land d

 

o

"!"D "! "D sr srae aell

o

"!"" "! "" =ap =apan an

o

"!"4 "!" 4 >u9e >u9embou mbourg rg

o

"!"A "! "A 'e9 'e9ico ico

o

"!"1 "!" 1 eth etherla erlands nds

o

"!"G "!" G ew Keal Kealand and

o

"!"@ "! "@ or orwa way y

o

"!"$ "!" $ Phili Philippi ppines nes

o

"!"# "!" # Swit) Swit)erla erland nd

o

"!"0 "! "0 Swe Sweden den

o

"!4D "! 4D (urk (urkey ey

o

"!4" "!4 " nite nited d ing ingdom dom

o

"!44 "!4 4 nite nited d State States s

o

"!4A "!4 A rug ruguay uay



4 on-gove on-governmental rnmental organi)ations



A Lefe Leferenc rences es



1 39te 39ternal rnal links

Euthanasia law by country Hedit editII

Australia Hedit editII Main article:  article: Euthanasia in Australia

3uthanasia is illegal in &ustralia in &ustralia!! t once was legal in the orthern (erritory, (erritory, by the Lights of the (erminally ll &ct "00G! "00G! n "00$, the &ustralian 5ederal Fovernment overrode the orthern (erritory (erritory legislation through the introduction of the 3uthanasia >aws &ct "00$!H4I nlike the states states,, legislation in the orthern (erritory is not guaranteed by the the &ustralian  &ustralian constitution! constitution! Before this law was passed by the &ustralian Fovernment, %r!  %r!  Philip itschke  itschke helped three people by them using his  %eliverance machine! his machine! *rganisations such as 39it nternational  nternational /founded by itschke himself2,

 

want the government to bring back euthanasia rights to &ustralia! 39it made (J commercials which were banned before they made it to air in September 4D"D! HAI

BelgiumHedit editII (he Belgian Belgian parliament  parliament legalised euthanasia on 4# 'ay 4DD4! H1IHGI  & survey survey published in 4D"D reported that those those who died from euthanasia /compared /compared with other deaths2 were more often younger, male, cancer patients and more often died in their homes! n almost all cases, unbearable physical suffering were reported! 3uthanasia for nonterminal patients p atients H@IH$I $I was rare!H@IH  (here have been about ",1DD cases a year since the law was introduced, and a record

",#D$ cases were recorded in 4D"A!H#IH0I n %ecember 4D"A, the Belgian Senate voted in favour of e9tending its euthanasia law to terminally ill children! Conditions imposed on children seeking euthanasia are Mthe patient must be conscious of  their decision and understand the meaning of euthanasiaM, Mthe re+uest must have been approved by the childNs parents and medical teamM, Mtheir illness must be terminalM, Mthey must be in great pain, with no available treatment to alleviate their distressM!H"DI &  & psychologist psychologist must  must also determine the patientNs maturity to make the decision! (he amendment emphasi)es that the patientNs re+uest be voluntary! H""I

CanadaHedit editII Main article:  article: Euthanasia in Canada

.hile it was illegal to Maid and abet suicideM under Section 41"/b2 of the Criminal Code of Canada, which states that this is an indictable offence with a potential fourteen-year sentence if the appellant is found guilty, British ColumbiaNs Supreme Court struck down the section, arguing that it imposed unconscionably discriminatory burdens on severely disabled individuals that were not valid under Sections $ and "G of the Charter of Lights and 5reedoms  5reedoms  on =une "G, 4D"4! (hus, Canadian euthanasia and assisted suicide law are currently in legal limbo, although CanadaNs federal Parliament had until =une 4D"A to deal with the conse+uences of this decision!H"4I (he Canadian 'edical &ssociation has declared neutrality on the issue! *n @ 5ebruary 4D"G, the Supreme Court of Canada unanimously ruled in Carter v Canada (AG) that Canadian adults who are mentally competent and suffering intolerably and permanently have the right to a doctorNs help in dying! (he court however suspended its ruling for "4 months to give the government an opportunity to write leglislation and draft new laws and policies around assisted H"AIH"1I "1I dying!H"AIH

 

editII ColombiaHedit n a @-A decision, ColombiaNs Constitutional Court ruled in "00$ that Mno person can be held criminally responsible for taking the life of a terminally ill patient who has given clear authori)ation to do so,M according to the .ashington Post!H"GI (he court defined Mterminally illM person as those with diseases such as Mcancer, &%S, &%S, and kidney or liver failure if they are terminal and the cause of e9treme suffering,M the Post reported! (he ruling specifically refused to authori)e euthanasia for people with degenerative diseases such as &l)heimerNs, ParkinsonNs, or >ou FehrigNs disease!

editII DenmarkHedit Parliament has assigned ethics panels over the years that have advised against legalisation each timeH"@I however it is still not specifically outlawedH"$I and a study published in 4DDA showed 1"O of deaths under medical supervision involved doctors taking Mend-of-lifeM decisions to help ease their H"#IH"0I "0I patientsN suffering before death /about "O of which were via prescription drugs2! H"#IH

editII FinlandHedit (here is a grey area because of no mention in any criminal code and so it is tolerated amongst H4DIH4"I 4"I friends when done discreetly! %octors do not formally perform it! H4DIH

editII FranceHedit n =uly 4D"A, 5rench President  President  5ranois Eollande stated Eollande stated his personal support for decriminalisation of voluntary euthanasiai euthanasiain 5rance, which had been one of his presidential campaign promises /Mintroduction of the right to die with dignityM2, despite ob6ections from 5ranceNs ational Consultative 3thics Committee< ComitQ national consultatif dNQthi+ue, dNQthi+ue, which alleged MabusesM in ad6acent  6urisdictions that have decriminalised and and regulated either voluntary euthanasia or physicianphysicianassisted suicide /Belgium /Belgium,, Swit)erland Swit)erland,, the etherlands etherlands and  and >u9embourg >u9embourg2! 2! t remains to be seen whether President Eollande will be successful in his ob6ectives, given that the Catholic Church in Church in 5rance and other religious social conservatives have announced that after forthright opposition to the introduction of  same-se9 marriage in 5rance, 5rance, their ne9t target may be any such decriminalisation of voluntary euthanasia! euthanasia!H44I

ndiaHedit editII Main article:  article: Euthanasia in ndia

Passive euthanasia is euthanasia is legal in ndia! H4AI *n $ 'arch 4D"" the Supreme Court of ndia legalised ndia legalised passive euthanasia by means of the withdrawal of life support to support to patients in a permanent vegetative H41IH4GI 4GI state!!H41IH state  5orms of &ctive of &ctive euthanasia, euthanasia, including the administration of lethal compounds, are illegal! H4@I

 

editII relandHedit n reland reland,, it is illegal for a doctor /or anyone2 to activel!  contribute  contribute to someoneNs death! t is not, however, illegal to remove life support and other treatment /the Mright to dieM2 should a person /or their ne9t of kin2 re+uest it! & September 4D"D rish (imes poll showed that a ma6ority, G$O of adults, believed that doctor-assisted suicide should be legal for terminally ill patients who re+uest it! H4$I

sraelHedit editII (he sraeli sraeli Penal  Penal >aw forbids causing the death of another and specifically forbids shortening the life of another! &ctive &ctive euthanasia is forbidden by both sraeli law and =ewish law! Passive euthanasia is forbidden by =ewish law but has been accepted in some cases under sraeli law!H4#I n 4DDG, proposals were put forward to allow passive euthanasia to be administered using a switch mechanism similar to  to Sabbath clocks! clocks!H40I n 4DD@, the Steinberg Commission was set up to look into whether life and death issues could be rethought in the conte9t of =ewish law, which suggested that hospitals could set up committees to determine whether patients would be given passive euthanasia! HADI

!apanHedit editII (he =apanese =apanese government  government has no official laws on the status of euthanasia and the Supreme Court of =apan  =apan has never ruled on the matter! Lather, Lather, to date, =apanNs euthanasia policy has been decided by two local court cases, one in agoya agoya in  in "0@4, and another after an incident at  at  (okai niversity in niversity in "00G! (he first case involved Mpassive euthanasiaM / 消極的安楽死 sh"#!$#ute#i anra#ushi  anra#ushi 2 /i!e!, ?

allowing a patient to die by turning off life support2 and the latter case involved Mactive euthanasiaM /積極的安楽死 se##!$#ute#i anra#ushi 2 /e!g!, through in6ection2! (he 6udgments in these ?

cases set forth a legal framework and a set of conditions within which both passive and active euthanasia could be legal! evertheless, in both of these particular cases the doctors were found guilty of violating these conditions when taking the lives of their patients! 5urther, because the findings of these courts have yet to be upheld at the national level, these precedents are not necessarily binding! evertheless, at present, there is a tentative legal framework for implementing euthanasia in =apan!HA"I n the case of passive euthanasia, three conditions must be met7 "! the patient must be suffering from an incurable disease, and in the final stages of the disease from which he<she is unlikely to make a recoveryR

 

4! the patient patient must give e9press e9press consent to stopping stopping treatment treatment,, and this consent must must be obtained and preserved prior to death! f the patient is not able to give clear consent, their consent may be determined from a pre-written document such as a living will or will or the testimony of the familyR A! the patient may be passively euthani)ed by stopping medical treatment, chemotherapy, dialysis, artificial respiration, blood transfusion, J drip, etc! 5or active euthanasia, four conditions must be met7 "! the patient patient must must be suffering suffering from from unbearable unbearable physical physical painR painR 4! death must be inevitab inevitable le and drawi drawing ng nearR nearR A! the patient must give consent! /nlike passive euthanasia, living wills and family consent will not suffice!2 1! the physician physician must have /ineffe /ineffective ctively2 ly2 e9hausted e9hausted all other measures measures of pain relief! relief! (he problems that arose from this, in addition to the problem faced by many other families in the country, has led to the creation of Mbioethics S.&( teamsM! HA4I (hese teams will be made available to the families of terminally ill patients in i n order to help them, along with the doctors, come to a decision based on the personal facts of the case! (hough in its early stages and relying on “subsidies from the 'inistry of Eealth, >abor and .elfare” there are plans to create a nonprofit organi)ation to “allow this effort to continue!”  continue!” HAAI

"u#embourgHedit editII (he countryNs parliament passed a bill legali)ing euthanasia on 4D 5ebruary 4DD# in the first reading with AD of G0 votes in favour! *n "0 'arch 4DD0, the bill passed the second reading, making >u9embourg the third 3uropean nion country, after the etherlands and Belgium, to decriminalise euthanasia! (erminally (erminally ill patients will have the option of euthanasia after receiving the approval of two doctors and a panel of e9perts!HA1I

editII Me#icoHedit Main article:  article: Euthanasia in Me%ic$

n 'e9ico 'e9ico,, active euthanasia is illegal but since $ =anuary 4DD# the law allows the terminally ill or closest relatives, if unconscious to refuse medication or further medical treatment to e9tend life /also known as passive euthanasia2 in  in 'e9ico City, City,HAGI in the central state of &guascalientes of &guascalientes  /since @

 

 &pril 4DD02HA@I and, since " September 4DD0, in the .estern state of 'ichoacTn! 'ichoacTn!HA$I & similar law e9tending the same provisions at the national level has been approved by the  the  senateHA#I and an initiative decriminali)ing active euthanasia has entered the same legislative chamber on "A &pril 4DD$!HA0I

$etherlands Hedit editII Main article:  article: Euthanasia in the &etherlands

n the "0$A MPostma caseM a physician was convicted for having facilitated the death of her mother following repeated e9plicit re+uests for euthanasia! H1DI .hile upholding the conviction, the courtNs  6udgment set out criteria when a doctor would not be re+uired to keep a patient alive contrary to their  will! (his set of criteria was formali)ed in the course of a number of court cases during the "0#Ds! n 4DD4, the  the etherlands etherlands passed  passed a law legali)ing euthanasia including physician-assisted suicide!  (his law codifies the twenty-year-old convention of not prosecuting doctors who have committed

H1"I

euthanasia in very specific cases, under very specific circumstances! (he 'inistry of Public Eealth, .ellbeing and Sports claims Sports claims that this practice Mallows a person to end their life in dignity after having received every available type of palliative care!MH14I (he nited ations has reviewed and commented on the etherlands euthanasia law!H1AI n September 4DD1 the Froningen Protocol  Protocol was developed, which sets out criteria to be met for carrying out child euthanasia without euthanasia without the physician being prosecuted!H11I

$ew %ealandHedit editII Main article:  article: Euthanasia in &e' ealand 

 &ssisted suicide and voluntary euthanasia remain illegal in  in ew Kealand  Kealand under Section "$0 of the ew Kealand Crimes &ct "0@", which renders it a criminal offence o ffence to Maid and abet suicide!M (here have been two prior decriminalisation attempts- the %eath .ith %ignity Bill "00G and the %eath .ith %ignity Bill 4DDA! Both failed, although the latter only did so by a three-vote margin within the ew Kealand Parliament! n 'ay 4D"4,  4D"4,  >abour Party of ew Kealand  Kealand 'P 'aryan Street introduced a private  memberNs bill into private bill into the ballot bo9, the 3nd of >ife Choices Bill, which was took over by 'P ain >ees-Falloway when she failed to get re-elected in the 4D"1 Feneral 3lection! (he bill was dropped in %ec 4D"1 under the re+uest of >abour Party of ew Kealand leader  Kealand leader  &ndrew  &ndrew >ittle  >ittle as the issue was deemed to be distracting from bigger issues that concens the party!H1GI

 

editII $orwayHedit 3uthanasia remains illegal, though a caregiver may receive a reduced punishment for taking the life of someone who consents to it, or for, out of compassion, taking the life of a person that is Mhopelessly sickM!H1@I

editII &hilippines Hedit 3uthanasia is illegal in the Philippines! n "00$, the  the  Philippine Senate considered Senate considered passing a bill legali)ing passive euthanasia! (he bill met strong opposition from the countryNs Catholic Church! f legali)ed the Philippines would have been the first country to legali)e euthanasia! nder current laws, doctors assisting a patient to die can be imprisoned and charged with malpractice! H1$I

'wit(erland Hedit editII Main article:  article: Euthanasia in 'it*erland 

n Swit)erland, deadly drugs may be prescribed to a Swiss person or to a foreigner, where the recipient takes an active role in the drug administration! H1#I 'ore generally, article ""G of the Swiss penal code, which came into effect in "014 /having been written in "0"#2, considers assisting suicide a crime if and only if the motive is selfish!

editII 'wedenHedit Passive euthanasia was deemed legal after a landmark court ruling in 4D"D! (his means a health care professional can legally cease life support upon re+uest from a patient, however administering a lethal substance is illegal!H10I

editII )urkeyHedit 3uthanasia is strictly forbidden in  in  (urkey (urkey!! (he aide who helped a person to suicide or other ways to kill oneself will be punished for assisting and encouraging suicide under the stipulation of article #1 of the (urkish Criminal >aw! >aw! n condition of active euthanasia, article #" of the same law sets forth that any person who carries out this act will be 6udged and punished for life imprisonnement 6ust like a simple murder!

*nited +ingdomHedit editII Main article:  article: Euthanasia in the +nited in-d$m

3uthanasia is illegal in the  the nited ingdom! ingdom! &ny person found to be assisting suicide is breaking the HGDIHG"I G"I law and can be convicted of assisting suicide or attempting to do so! HGDIH  Eowever, the %irector of

 

Public Prosecutions has issued guidelines setting out when a prosecution is, or is not, likely to happen!HG4I Between 4DDA and 4DD@ >ord =offe  =offe made four attempts to introduce bills that would have h ave legalised voluntary euthanasia ; all were re6ected by the  Parliament! HGAICurrently, Currently,  %r igel Co9 is Co9 is the only British doctor to have been convicted of attempted euthanasia! Ee was given a "4" 4monthsuspended month suspended sentence in sentence in "004! "004!HG1I n regard to the principle of double effect, effect, in "0G$ =udge %evlin in %evlin in the trial of %r =ohn Bodkin  &dams ruled  &dams  ruled that causing death through the administration of lethal drugs to a patient, if the intention is solely to alleviate pain, is not considered murder even if death is a potential or even likely outcome!HGGI

*nited 'tatesHedit editII Main article:  article: Euthanasia in the +nited tates ee als$: Assisted als$: Assisted suicide in the +nited tates

 &ctive euthanasia is illegal throughout the the nited States! States! Patients retain the rights to refuse medical treatment and to receive appropriate management of pain at their re+uest /passive euthanasia2, even if the patientsN choices hasten their deaths! &dditionally, &dditionally, futile or disproportionately burdensome treatments, such as life-support machines, may be withdrawn under specified circumstances and, under federal law and most state laws l aws only with the informed consent of the patient or, in the event of the incompetence of the patient, with the informed consent of the legal surrogate! (he Supreme Court of the nited States has not dealt with M+uality of life issuesM or Mfutility issuesM and appears to only condone active or passive MeuthanasiaM /not legally defined2 when there is clear and convincing evidence that informed consent to the euthanasia, passive or active, has been obtained from the competent patient or the legal surrogate of the incompetent patient! .hile active euthanasia is illegal throughout the S, assisted suicide  suicide is legal HG@IHG$I G$I in *regon *regon,, .ashington .ashington,,Jermont Jermont,, one county inew inew 'e9ico, 'e9ico, and is de .act$ legal in 'ontana 'ontana!!HG@IH

*ruguayHedit editII Since "0A4 the Penal Code of ruguay, ruguay, article A$, accept Compassionate Eomicide, the first legal document that include euthanasia! tNs important to say that this legal document didnNt use this denomination! n another article, "4$, the 6udge could waive the doctor, if this action was made by patient pledge and the doctor had an honorable reputation! HG#I (he main source of this Penal Code was =imenQ) de &sUa, a Spanish penalist, that introduce this concept in his book M>ibertad de amar y derecho a morir7 ensayos de un u n criminalista sobre eugenesia, eutanasia, endocrinologVaM, published in 'adrid<Spain, in "04#!HG0I (he first proposal to understand 3uthanasia as homicide was made by Luy Santos in his '% thesis, M%a resistencia dos estados mWrbidos X therapeutica e da

 

incurabilidade perante a euthanTsiaM, at 5aculdade de 'edicina da Bahia<Bra)il, in "04#! Ee made a difference between 3uthanasia as homicide and 3uthanasia as suicide, probably the first citation about &ssisted Suicide! Suicide!H@DI

Non-governmental organizationsHedit editII /urther in.$rmati$n:  in.$rmati$n: Assisted  Assisted suicider-ani*ati$ns in supp$rt supp$rt $. assisted suicide

(here are a number of historical studies about the thorough euthanasia-related policies of professional associations! n their analysis, Brody et al! found it necessary to distinguish such topics as euthanasia, physician-assisted suicide, informed consent and refusal, advance directives, pregnant patients, surrogate decision-making /including neonates2, %L orders, irreversible loss of consciousness, +uality of life /as a criterion for limiting end-of-life care2, withholding and withdrawing intervention, and futility! futility!H@"I Similar distinctions presumably are found outside the !S!, as with the H@4IH@AI @AI highly contested statements of the British 'edical &ssociation!H@4IH

*n euthanasia /narrowly defined here as directly causing death2, Brody sums up the !S! medical F* arena7 (he debate in the ethics literature on euthanasia is 6ust as divided as the debate on physicianassisted suicide, perhaps more so! Slippery-slope arguments are often made, supported by claims about abuse of voluntary euthanasia in the etherlands!!!! &rguments &rguments against it are based on the integrity of medicine as a profession! n response, autonomy a utonomy and +uality-of-life-base arguments are made in support of euthanasia, underscored by claims that when the only way to relieve a dying patientNs pain or suffering is terminal sedation with loss of consciousness, death is a preferable alternative -- an argument also made in support of physician-assisted suicide! H@1I *ther F*s that advocate for and against various euthanasia-related policies are found throughout the world! &mong proponents, perhaps the leading F* is the Ns %ignity in %ying, %ying, the successor to the /Jolunta /Joluntary2 ry2 3uthanasia Society!H@GIn addition to professional and religious groups, there are F*s opposed to euthanasia H@@I found in various countries!

hey were once a family, though not always a happy one!

 

*n one hand is Eenedina >aurel-Jelasco and her siblings, descendants of %r! =ose Li)al, their great-grand uncle! *n the other is 'ary &nn 'anansala>aurel, who came from rather humbler beginnings in 'alabon! (heir common denominator was 'ario >aurel, brother to Eenedina and husband to 'ary &nn for almost 44 years! 'ario and 'ary &nn had three children! 'ario:s siblings and e9-wife found themselves together again on 'onday, though on opposite sides in a court room in ue)on City! 'ary &nn and their son Patrick stand accused of killing 'ario on Sept! 4, 4DD$! =udge Bernelito 5ernande) is hearing 'ary &nn:s petition for bail! She was arrested at the airport last &pril G on her way back to the nited States! She has since been detained at the ue)on City =ail 5emale %ormitory! Eer son is in the !S!  &llegedly upon his mother:s instructions, Patrick pulled the plug on 'ario, who was then in a coma! 'ario:s siblings sued 'ary &nn and her son for murder, but the case was dismissed by the prosecutor! n 4D"D, the %epartment of =ustice reversed the prosecutor:s ruling and ordered the filing of parricide charges against 'ary &nn and her son! “Clearly the removal of the life support system and the withholding of medical treatment upon instructions of respondents 'ary &nn and Patrick were the pro9imate cause of the death of 'ario,” according to the %*= resolution!

 

Eenedina >aurel-Jelasco said 'ary &nn:s arrest last &pril brought back hope for the family that her brother would get 6ustice! “t:s still a very heavy burden on us because we 6ust don:t know how this case is going to turn out to b be,” e,” she told &BS-CB ews! “.e 6ust hope that our brother will still have 6ustice in our lifetime and we will see closure to the whole case!” %efense counsel 'arlon &le9andre Cru) said there was no “iota of truth” to the allegation against 'ary &nn and her son! “She:s not supposed to be in 6ail in the first place and there is no evidence whatsoever, other than the mere say-so of the complainant, who was not even there when this incident happened,” he said! *n the surface, it was said to be a case of euthanasia, an issue that:s especially ticklish in predominantly Catholic Philippines! Catholic teaching considers direct euthanasia as “morally unacceptable!” M3ven if death is thought imminent, the ordinary care owed to a sick person cannot be legitimately interrupted,M according to the Catechism of the Catholic Church! n the 4D"D resolution, the %*= said7 “3uthanasia in the Philippines as in the instant case is still murder and any physician who assists a person in taking his<her own life is liable for the crime of assisting a person to commit suicide under the Levised Penal Code!” Based on the allegations, there was more to 'ario:s death than mercy killing!

 

'ary &nn allegedly collected a huge sum in her husband:s insurance! She had also been allegedly divorced from 'ario for about three months before she rushed to his death bed in 'anila! *n 'onday, the prosecution presented a medico-legal e9pert to help prove that based on hospital records, 'ario should not have been removed from life support!  &lso taking the witness stand was California-based lawyer Lodel Lodis, who had take 'ary &nn:s deposition in a separate defamation case against the >aurel siblings in the !S! “n the deposition, she made very damaging admissions about her marriage to =oseph (imbol before she married 'ario >aurel, and admissions about the se+uence of events that showed that she already divorced 'ario in the !S!, already married (imbol, when she then went to the Philippines when 'ario was sick and started asserting herself as the spouse,” he said! “She clearly had a motive because she was going to collect Y"!$G million and that proved damaging!” 'ary &nn:s lawyer Cru) said the case clearly had something to do with what 'ario had left behind! “ can assure you that these are utterly trumped-up charges against her and against the son,” he said! “t:s ultimately about the estate! .ere it not for the dispute about the estate,  don:t think this case would have been filed!”

 

.hatever the truth is, it:s still a long way to go in this bitter family saga! INQUIRER

I flew to Manila over the July 4th weekend to testify as a witness in a Quezon City courtroom on July 6 to authenticate the deposition I did of Mary Ann Laurel in my an !rancisco law office close to seven years a"o# he has $een char"ed with %parricide& for the murder of her former hus$and' Mario Laurel' after alle"edly directin" her son' (atrick Laurel' to turn off Mario)s life support system when he was in a coma at the Capitol Medical Center on eptem$er *' *++,' causin" his immediate death# (art of the evidence a"ainst her were the admissions she made in that civil deposition#

-ead more. http://globalnation.inquirer.net/126052/was-it-er!"#illing$i%&&'g'0n()*+   !ollow us. ,inquirerotnet on witter witter  / inquirerotnet on a!eboo# he deposition I conducted of Mary Ann Laurel on Au"ust **' *++0 was in connection with the civil lawsuit she filed in anta Clara C lara County on March *4' *++0 alle"in" that her e12in laws 3 the $rother and three sisters of Mario Laurel 3 had defamed her $y accusin" her of murderin" their $rother# he Laurel si$lin"s retained me to defend them in that civil action# Damaging admissions  &%J3L(S3'3( 3(  &%J3L(S3'







In the course of my whole day deposition of Mary Ann Laurel' she admitted under  penalty of per5ury' per5ury' that.   he ha twi!e arrie oseph ib ibol. ol. he 3rst tie in 141 three "ears a7ter she starte wor#ing as a 8ight attenant 7or 9uwaiti irwa"s an the se!on tie on une ; 14<. Neither o7 her

arriages to ibol was e=er annulle be7ore she arrie >ario ?aurel.   he arrie >ario ?aurel in Reno Ne=aa on @e!eber 1< 145. t the tie >ario was a U.. postal wor#er who ha been pre=iousl" arrie an i=or!e 7ro Rosal"n (elasque&. >ario a U.. !iti&en then petitione >ar" nn to be a U.. iigrant. he is now an eri!an !iti&en.   he 3le her petition 7or i=or!e 7ro >ario ?aurel in anta Alara Aount" uperior Aourt on ul" 2 2006 a7ter the" ha been separate 7or ore than a "ear. >ario was in the Bhilippines when he was ser=e with the i=or!e pape papers rs whi!h he i not !ontest.  he 3nal Cugent Cugent o7 issolution w was as grante on une une 1< 200 200;. ;.

 



   wee# a7ter her i=or!e 7ro >ario >ar" nn arrie oseph  ibol  ib ol 7or the thir thir  tie in Reno Reno Ne=aa on une une 22 200;. 200;. After uittin" his 5o$ as a postman' Mario moved $ack to the (hilippines in *++7# 8n Au"ust *4' *++,' Mario was $rou"ht to an Juan 9e 9ios :ospital in (asay City  $ecause of hi"h fever and difficulty difficulty $reathin"# Mar Mario)s io)s sisters' :enedina Laurel2 ;elasco and Isa$elita Laurel2-and' transferred him to Capitol Medical Center in Quezon City where he then suffered cardiac arrest on Au"ust <+' *++, and went into a coma after he was revived# 8n Au"ust <=' *++,' Mary Ann and her dau"hter' >ianca' arrived in Manila to 5oin her  son' (atrick' who was already in the (hilippines# hey then proceeded to the hospital where Mario was confined and' with a lawyer' Mary A Ann nn asserted to Mario)s two sisters that she had %full char"e and authority& over Mario and prohi$ited them from enterin" the hospital room of their $rother# he two sisters reluctantly complied even thou"h they protested that Mary Ann was already divorced from Mario and that she was already married to im$ol# Pulling the plug Accordin" to the affidavit of Isa$elita Laurel2-and' she returned to the hospital room

of Mario on eptem$er *' *++, despite Mary Ann) Ann)ss $an# ?hile in the hospital room' she witnessed a nurse hand a piece of paper to Mary Ann' which she then handed over  to (atrick who read the paper and who then asked her' %?hat shall I write w rite as reason@& Mary Ann replied' %To prevent prolonging the agony,” which (atrick then dutifully wrote on the paper#

 

&hoto o a young Mario "aurel provided by -enedina "aurel./elasco0 "aurel./elasco0 After (atrick si"ned the %?a %?aiver iver of 9 9ia"nostic ia"nostic (rocedures andor Medical reatment& hospital form' the nurse asked Isa$elita and >ianca to si"n as witnesses' which they did# Accordin" to Isa$elita)s affidavit' affidavit' she saw the nurse return to her nurse)s station and then saw (atrick %walk to the life support system attached to Mario# At the machine' (atrick hesitated and ueried % But Mom, isn’t this murder @& >ianca also voiced out' %Isn)t it that there are some people' after =+ years come out of their coma@& In her affidavit' Isa$elita recalled what happened ne1t. %Mary Ann sternly retorted' BJust do it) to (atrick and i"nored >ianca)s remark# hereupon' (atrick switched off the machine' its li"hts went off' and then the monitor went flat 3 Mario was "one#&

 

Isa$elita said that she then %rushed out of the IC room while cryin"' called my sisters to inform them that Mario)s life support system had $een switched off and that our dear $rother had passed away#& Collecting insurance proceeds After Mario)s death' Mary Ann o$tained certified copies of his death certificate' which she furnished to his life insurance carriers# In my deposition of Mary Ann on Au"ust **' *++0' I asked her how many insurance policies Mario had with her as the sole  $eneficiary# he first declined to answ answer' er' $ut her llawyer' awyer' ? ?illiam illiam ( (## 9al 9aley' ey' answered that there were two# ?hen I asked her how much they were for' she replied' %D %Dou ou know' I didn)t know#& know#& pon further proddin"' she said' %It was half a million#& hat was for the first policy# And And for the second@ %he other one was =#*& Mary Ann Laurel had collected E=#, million dollars from Mario)s two insurance  policies# In her deposition' deposition' I asked Mary Ann if she ha had d disclosed to the insu insurance rance companies that she had already divorced Mario# he answered' %?ell' %?ell' they never ask me#& Mary Ann)s Ann)s admissions in her *++0 deposition' which was contained in a <672pa"e  $inder' formed the $asis for my successful m motion otion to dismiss the defamation defamation causes of  action she had filed a"ainst my clients# More si"nificantly' they provided the factual information that resulted in the su$seuent filin" of criminal char"es# 8n May *+' *+=+' Assistant City (rosecutor -omana 9el -osario filed a criminal Information a"ainst (atrick Laurel and Mary Ann M# im$ol char"in" that % on or about the 2nd day of Sept, 2007, in Quezon City, Philippines, the said accused Patrick  Laurel, being the son of the deceased Mario anaad Laurel, !ith intent to kill, did then th en and there, !illfully !illfully,, unla!fully and feloniously re"o#e the life support syste" of the said Mario anaad Laurel, upon instructions of the accused Mary  $nn M% &i"bol, the legiti"ate spouse of the de deceased, ceased, and b by y !ithholding of "edical treat"ent by respondent Patrick Laurel, #& !hich resultedoftothe the death ofofthe #icti" he investi"ation 9epartment Justice as contained in its -esolution determined that 'a thorough e(a"ination of the record failed to "ention any particular physician !ho rendered a categorical declaration ) fro" the scienti*c point of #ie! ) that Mario !as clinically dead nor a reco#ery fro" the co"a is nil% &aking the foregoing into account, it is apparent that although in a co"a at the ti"e, Mario !as ali#e, scienti*cally and biologically biologically%% +e e(pired due to cardiac arrest and "ultiple organ failure !hen the "echanical #entilator attached to hi" !as turned o%-  Motive is irrelevant he -esolution e1plained. %.n this legal /urisdiction, it is not for any

 person to decide decide !hen a " "an an or a !o"an is ripe1 ripe1 for the taki taking ng or

 

killing !hile he or she is in a co"a% uthanasia in the Philippines as in the instant case is still "urder3 $ good "oti#e is not inco"patible !ith an unla!ful intent% 4ne "ay be con#icted of a cri"e !hether his "oti#e appears to be good or bad or e#en though no "oti#e is pro#en% $ good "oti#e does not pre#ent an act fro" being a cri"e%-  Fven thou"h the murder char"e was filed in *+=+' Mary Ann was only arrested on April 7' *+=7 when she was a$out to $oard a return fli"ht to an !rancisco# he had apparently $een in the nited tates since *++, and had not returned to Manila until March of *+=7# Mary Ann Laurel has $een incarcerated in a Quezon City 5ail since then and held without $ail' awaitin" trial# :er lawyer' Marlon A Ale1ander le1ander Cruz' told A>2C>G Gews reporter Christian Fs"uerra that there is %no iota of truth& to any of the alle"ations a"ainst his client#

Cover page o deposition o Mary Ann "aurel taken on August 11, 12230 >ut it is undisputed that it was (atrick Laurel who turned off the life support ventilator  system that kept Mario alive and that he did so at the direction of his mother# he pro$lem for Cruz and his client is that mercy killin" or euthanasia is not le"al in the (hilippines# In the ##' where it is le"al' there are strict hospital protocols that have to $e followed $efore the hospital can %pull the plu"& on a patient# Hospital protocols Jud"e Andrew (# (# Gapolitano' !o1 Gews le"al e1pert' e1plained that %the law in Gew Dork Do rk says if two physicians decide the patient is in a Bhopelessly ve"etative state') and

no natural or unnatural means are likely to return the patient to a co"nitive state' and

 

the patient)s representative representative a"rees' then the medical center may terminate life support#& >efore I testified in the Quezon City courtroom on July 6' a medico2le"al e1pert' 9r# -odel ;# ;# Capule' informed the court that his review of the hospital records of Mario Laurel at the Capitol Medical Center disclosed that Mario)s vital si"ns were still in "ood order and that he was neither $rain dead nor in a ve"etative state when his life support system was turned off# o even if Mario Laurel had $een in a coma and confined in a Gew Dor Dork k hospital' it would still have $een a crime for (atrick Laurel to %pull the plu"#& his would $e true even if it were simply done %to prevent prolon"in" his a"ony& and not for the purpose of collectin" E=#, million in insurance proceeds# he %mercy killin"& of Mario Laurel on eptem$er *' *++, was still a killin" and it was still a crime# If Mary Ann Laurel is somehow acuitted of the parricide char"e' a precedent may $e set effectively le"alizin" euthanasia in the (hilippines# 5Send co""ents to 6odel08g"ail%co" 6odel08g"ail%co" or "ail the" to the La! 49ces of 6odel 6odis at 2:2; 4cean $#enue, San <rancisco, C$

;:=27 or call :=%>>:%7?00@% -ead more. http://globalnation.inquirer.net/126052/was-it-er!"#illing$i%&&'g'1*0D4   !ollow us. ,inquirerotnet on witter witter  / inquirerotnet on a!eboo#

Sponsor Documents

Or use your account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Forgot your password?

Or register your new account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link to create a new password.

Back to log-in

Close