While those in favor of the right to die argue that terminally ill patients should be. Euthanasia is very often associated with the right to die with dignity, which can be interpreted in many ways.
ETHICAL AND MORAL VIEWS
The Shulhan Arukh (Code of Jewish Law) states that 'if there is a cause that prevents the dying man from dying, it is permissible to remove this cause. In response to this, it is said that if human life is sacred, a person has rights and one of these rights is the right to avoid unnecessary pain and suffering.
PRACTICES IN OTHER COUNTRIES
2007.Australian Territories Rights of the Terminally III Bill 2007. b) the medical practitioner must be satisfied that:. i) the patient suffers from an illness that will lead to death; and (ii) there is no medical treatment that can reasonably be undertaken. iii) any medical treatment available IS limited to the relief of pain, suffering and/or distress;. Professor Devenish points out that although the moral arguments against euthanasia are compelling, and that active euthanasia may be open to abuse, the way in which it is practiced will depend on society, and in this regard he quotes Dworkin who points out that:. the critical question is whether a decent society will choose coercion or responsibility, whether it will seek to impose a collective judgment on matters of the deepest character to all, and whether it will allow its citizens and ask for the most central personality - define judgments about their own lives for themselves. 7Y. Although the bill was not recommended for further consideration by the House of Lords, it did not completely close the door to euthanasia and assisted suicide to be considered further at a later stage.
EUTHANASIA IN SOUTH AFRICA
In sound medical judgment, there is no medical action acceptable to the patient which could reasonably be performed in the hope of producing a cure; and. iii). In the case of a qualified psychiatrist referred to in subparagraph (ii) - that the patient does not suffer from treatable clinical depression related to the disease;. d) The disease causes severe pain or suffering to the patient. e). The doctor informed the patient about the nature of the disease and its likely course and treatment. including palliative care, counseling and psychiatric support and emergency life support measures that may be available to the patient; f) after the notification from paragraph (e), the patient informs the doctor that he has decided to end his life; g).
The doctor is confident that the patient has considered the possible implications of the patient's decision for his or her family. H). The physician is reasonably satisfied that the patient is of sound mind and that the patient's decision to end his or her life was made freely, voluntarily and after careful consideration; i) The patient, or a person acting on behalf of the patient in accordance with Article 9, has signed that part of the agreement not earlier than seven days after the patient has notified his or her doctor as referred to in paragraph (f). certificate of request to be completed by or on behalf of the patient;
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AND OTHER LEGISLATION
In S v MakwanyanelOO the court described the right to dignity and the right to life as the most important human rights. The Court pointed out that the right to dignity is intricately linked to other human rights. 34; The recognition of a right to dignity is a recognition of the intrinsic value of people: people are entitled to be treated as worthy of respect and concern.
From the decisions of the Constitutional Court it can be established that the 1996 Constitution speaks of a right to life, but not of a duty to live, and this may mean that the right to life is not an absolute duty to continue not to live. Could there be a conflict between the 'right to life' in s91C and a mother's right to personal privacy' in terms of s131C and her possible right to the freedom and control of her body.
CAN EUTHANASIA AND ASSISTED SUICIDE BE PERCEIVED AS ACCEPTABLE IN SOUTH
The decision at this point depended on the quality of the remaining life of the patient. The court consequently ruled that the applicant would be justified in the circumstances to stop the artificial nutrition of the patient even if it would hasten his death. 117. Professor Willem Landman of the Ethics Institute of SA argued that there is a strong ethical argument for euthanasia and assisted suicide in South Africa based on consistency, fairness and in terms of the Constitution.
Regarding the question of whether terminally ill patients had the right to die with medical assistance, 46 percent of respondents agreed. can provide is to alleviate the suffering of terminally ill patients. The constitutional principles of life, human dignity, privacy and the liberty and security of the person should therefore be read in such a way that a person can claim a right to die and therefore can have control over the time, circumstances and method. of his death.
RECOGNISING CHILDREN'S RIGHTS
The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child25 ("UNCRC") brought about significant changes in the way minors are perceived. Anderson and Spijker suggest that a child's right to express his or her opinion and have his or her opinion taken seriously is one of the striking features of the Convention. 34; best interests of the child, and a legal duty is placed on States Parties to the Convention to develop policies that will uphold the goals, values and rights contained in the Convention.
126A Anderson and A Spijker 'Considering the views of the child when determining her best interests' (2002) Obiter365,369. In fact, Article 7 of the African Charter and Article 12 of the UN Convention seek to guarantee the same rights regarding expression,135 allowing a child to have a say in matters affecting his or her interests and well-being.
DETERMINING THE BEST INTEREST OF A CHILD
However, constitutional guarantees of children's rights must be seen within the context of the status and implementation of these rights. Protecting the child's right to life was in the child's best interest and the parents' refusal to allow blood transfusions was not justifiable or reasonable. Article 3(1) of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) and Article 4(1) of the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (1990), also recognize that the best interests of the child must be in the main consideration.,151.
It has been argued that it is time to really focus on the core issue, namely what is in the best interests of the child, as this is of paramount importance in any matter involving the child. South Africa should put mechanisms in place to allow the best interests of the child to be taken into account.
EUTHANASIA AND ASSISTED SUICIDE FOR CHILDREN
In terms of the 1996 Constitution, every child should, subject to certain specific limitations on their fundamental rights, enjoy the same protection under the Bill of Rights as adults.177 The 1996 Constitution also contains specific provisions requiring the courts to apply international law include their considerations. deliberations. If the children's decisions are not defective and are fully autonomous, there should be no reason to conclude that they cannot make decisions as adults do under the same circumstances. Even in religious circles, the best interests of the child are taken into account and decisions must be made in terms of the child's well-being.
One of the most common arguments for euthanasia and assisted suicide is the argument of mercy. Undercover, covert and '[c]landestine action is to be deplored; it is a dangerous undertaking.189 If children are legally allowed to express their views on their fate, these will be regulated by strict guidelines, and all decisions will be made in accordance with the best interests of the child – as currently in the practice is done. The Netherlands.
CONCLUSION
Dutch law allows a sixteen-year-old patient to request euthanasia after consulting their parents; Children between the ages of twelve and fifteen can also apply for euthanasia, but parental consent is required. Requiring parental consultation for a 16-year-old patient opens up many possible interpretations and arguably allows 16-year-old patients the right to euthanasia without parental consent. After consultation with parents, it can be interpreted that a sixteen-year-old minor must consult only with his parents.
Minors over the age of 16 should be allowed to make decisions about ending their lives in consultation with their parents or guardians, but approval should not be a necessity. Minors over 14 should be allowed the same right, but any final decisions should be made in consultation and with the approval of their parents and guardians.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Online] Available at http://www .oregon.gov/DHS/ph/pas/ar-index.shtml [accessed 14 October 2008]. Physician-Assisted Selficide in Oregon: A Medical Perspective' Michigan Law Review [Online] pp Available at http.splorg.org/publications/HendinFoley MichiganLawReview.pdf [accessed 14 October 2008]. Available at http://scholar.google.co.za/scholar?hl=en&lr=&q=info:biObzYID6DsJ:scholar.go ogle.com/&output=viewport&pg=l [accessed 21 November 2008].
Child Rights at the Core: The Use of International Law in South African Cases on Children's Socio-Economic Rights' 22 SAJHR 224. Beschikbaar op http://parlinfoweb.aph.gov.au/plweb/Repository/Legis/Bills/Linked/ 08020705.pdf [geraadpleegd op 22 november 2008].
