On 14 May, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) issued its decision in Gross v Switzerland. The Court found Switzerland to be in breach of Article 8 (Right to respect for private and family life) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
The case concerned a complaint made by Ms Gross, who is over 80 years old and wishes to end her life. She does not suffer from a clinical illness but is unwilling to continue suffering the decline of her physical and mental faculties. She approached a doctor and the national health board in 2009 with the objective of securing the lethal dose of a drug to commit suicide. Neither provided her with the drug and her case was heard before the Swiss Courts where her request was denied. She complained to the ECtHR, that by denying her the right to decide by what means and at what point her life would end, the Swiss authorities have breached Article 8.
The ECtHR held that Swiss law, while providing for the possibility of obtaining a lethal dose of a drug to commit suicide on medical prescription, does not provide sufficient guidelines ensuring clarity as to the extent of this right. The Swiss Federal Supreme Court’s case law entitles a doctor to prescribe a lethal drug if certain specific conditions are fulfilled. These conditions are outlined in the Medical Ethics Guidelines adopted by the Swiss Academy of Medical Sciences. These guidelines do not have the effect of legislation and are only applied in circumstances where a doctor is confident that the patient will not live beyond a number of days or weeks. The Court noted that the lack of clear guidelines acts as a deterrent for doctors. The uncertainty surrounding the law was likely to have caused Ms Gross a considerable degree of anguish. Such anguish could have been avoided had there been appropriate State-approved guidelines in place.
While the Court found a breach of Article 8 due to the absence of clear guidelines, it did not take a stance on the question of whether she should have been granted the possibility to acquire a lethal dose of the drug to commit suicide. The Court said such a decision should be provided for by national laws and guidelines.
Click here to read an article from Human Rights Europe.
Click here to read the third party intervention from the European Centre for Law and Justice.
In related news, two severely disabled men and a widow have taken their right to die case to the UK Court of Appeal. The three joined parties want health professionals to be legally protected if they assist people who wish to end their own lives. PILA bulletin readers may recall the High Court decision in this case in August 2012 in which the Court held that it was the choice of the Parliament whether to grant permission or not.
At the start of the hearing Lord Dyson said, “We are acutely aware of the desperate situation in which the appellants find themselves and we are very sympathetic.” However, he went on to add, “we cannot decide this case as a matter of personal sympathy.” It must be decided on the “basis of principles of law.” The case is on-going.
Click here to read an article from BBC News.