European Court of Human Rights: 64-year-old woman euthanasia due to depression is allowed

Adobe Stock

· The Strasbourg Court dismissed the complaint of a Belgian man whose mother had been euthanized the day after her death.

· The man alleged a violation of his mother's right to life and, in order to prevent him from saying goodbye, his right to respect for his private and family life.

· The situation took place in 2012.

· The European Court of Human Rights has ruled that the right to life does not preclude the legalization of euthanasia.

· The Ordo Iuris Institute submitted an opinion of a friend of the court in the proceedings, pointing to the impossibility of reconciling the legality of euthanasia with the right to life, as well as emphasizing the impact of such a patient's decision on the life of his family.

The case concerned Tom Mortier, whose mother had been euthanized, about which the hospital only notified him after the fact. His mother, Godelieva de Troyer, 64, suffered from chronic depression, worsened after her husband's death, and a difficult relationship with her two adult children, Tom Mortier and his sister, with whom she had not been in contact for two years.

In 2012, she formally applied for a lethal injection for "unbearable mental suffering". Belgium is one of the few countries in the world where the law allows the euthanasia of people suffering from depression, even if they are perfectly healthy. Her application was positively assessed by three psychiatrists, who stated that there was no chance of improving her mental health, but also stated that she acted "consciously and rationally" in the decision to take her own life. Shortly thereafter, the woman deposited 2.5 thousand. a euro donation to the LEIF association for euthanasia, to which the doctors involved in it belonged.

On April 19, 2012, the attending physician gave his mother a lethal injection of poison. Death occurred at 11:15 am. The next day the hospital notified the son that his mother had been killed the day before. Based on a report submitted by the attending physician, the Federal Commission for the Evaluation of Euthanasia has ruled that the euthanasia killing was carried out in accordance with the procedure. The committee was co-chairman of the same doctor who killed the patient and who did not withdraw from the examination of the case.

In 2014, Tom Mortier filed a complaint with the prosecutor's office about the crime committed by the doctors who had killed his mother. After more than three years of investigations, during which no significant steps had been taken, the prosecution dismissed them due to "insufficient evidence." In 2017, Tom Mortier lodged a complaint with the European Court of Human Rights, alleging a violation of his mother's right to life (Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights) and his right to respect for private and family life (Article 8 of the Convention), for depriving him of the opportunity to say goodbye to her before death.

In 2019, the Ordo Iuris Institute, with the consent of the President of the Third Section of the ECtHR, submitted an amicus curiae brief in the proceedings, indicating that the legality of the intentional killing of patients (even at their own request) is incompatible with the right of everyone to life, regardless of their state of health . The Institute also pointed out that the decision to take one's own life is not a strictly private matter, because the death of a loved one has a huge impact on the patient's family members. The family should at least have a guaranteed right to say goodbye to a loved one.

In 2022, the Strasbourg Court ruled that "the right to life may not be interpreted as prohibiting the conditional decriminalization of euthanasia." At the same time, however, it found that Belgium had breached Art. 2 of the Convention due to procedural deficiencies. First, in the Court's view, the treating physician should not have assessed himself in the work of the Federal Committee for the Evaluation of Euthanasia of which he was a member. Second, the investigation into the death of the applicant's mother was lengthy and unreliable.

- The judgment of the ECtHR in this case radically lowers the standard of protection of life, directly allowing states to legalize euthanatic murder. Meanwhile, Art. 2 of the Convention clearly states that "no one may be intentionally deprived of life", from which only three exceptions are provided relating to necessary defense, detention of the suspect and suppression by the state of illegal riots. Unfortunately, our position was understood by only two of the seven members of the panel in this case - Judge Georgios Serghides, who in a dissenting opinion rightly stated that "any form of euthanasia would be contrary to the fundamental right to life" and Judge María Elósegui, who quotes the opinion of the Institute agreed with our position on the destructive influence of euthanasia on the family of the killed patient, said Weronika Przebierała, Director of the International Law Center of the Ordo Iuris Institute.

Case of Mortier v. Belgium, judgment of the ECtHR of October 4, 2022.