Several complaints have now been lodged with the Federal Constitutional Court (BVerfG) against Section 217 of the German Criminal Code (StGB) on the “commercial promotion of assisted suicide”. The Humanist Association comments on this.
In a letter dated June 6, 2016, the Federal Constitutional Court gave the Humanist Union and the Humanist Association of Germany, along with other interest groups, the opportunity to comment on the complaints by September 30. As the Humanist Association, we have since submitted our statement. Erwin Kress, Vice President of the association, says: “We were happy to do so. The complaints against the law, as far as we are aware, are all justified.” On the one hand, this involved four people with life-threatening illnesses, mainly cancer and respiratory problems. They had been given the “green light” by Sterbehilfe Deutschland, i.e. the promise that they would receive help to end their lives voluntarily if they could no longer bear their suffering. This comforting opportunity was taken away from them by the law. Organizations such as Sterbehilfe Deutschland or DIGNITAS Deutschland are now no longer allowed to help with a suicide. Neither are doctors such as Uwe Christian Arnold, who have helped many people in the past, whether by pointing out bearable alternatives to life or by providing the means to allow a gentle death. “The law,” continues Erwin Kress, “is now also having side effects that were supposedly unintended by the legislator, although some advocates of the law may have their doubts.” Dr. Matthias Thöns, for example, has also lodged a complaint against the law. As a doctor in the Witten palliative care network, he is being deprived of the opportunity to assist a patient to end their life voluntarily in an emergency if they no longer see any alternatives. But the normal practical work of palliative physicians is also affected. Until now, they have been able to provide their patients who are being cared for at home with sufficient painkillers so that they can be treated for several days if necessary and can also increase the dose if their symptoms increase. If these drugs were sufficient for a suicide, they may no longer be provided, as this could be prosecuted as promoting suicide. For the same reasons, doctors, carers and nursing homes are no longer allowed to provide benevolent support for so-called euthanasia fasting (voluntarily abstaining from food and fluids), which can be regarded as a special form of suicide. “This deprives elderly and seriously ill people of an opportunity to end their lives, which offered them a longer phase of saying goodbye and where they could still back out after a few days. Doctors and carers with whom we work have repeatedly seen this as an acceptable way for a number of people to end their suffering,” emphasizes Erwin Kress. Counseling for elderly and sick people with suicidal intentions is now also no longer permitted if it does not rule out the possibility that the reasons for suicide are understandable from the outset. This is completely incomprehensible in terms of preventing wild suicides. The fact that many people who have turned to euthanasia organizations have been shown alternatives worth living for has not impressed the legislator either.
The Humanist Association has pointed all this out in its statement and explained that the constitutional complaints against Section 217 StGB are justified and that, from the association’s point of view, the law only causes harm and violates important fundamental rights and principles of our constitution. “The ban on organized assisted suicide benefits no one, but harms many,” is how Erwin Kress sums up the situation. Under the same title, he has explained in a study that the justification for the law cannot justify the interference in patient autonomy. The legislator’s fear that organized assisted suicide would tempt or pressure elderly and seriously ill people to commit suicide is not substantiated in the explanatory memorandum and cannot be substantiated. The law disregards both practical experience and the will of a large majority of the population, who wish to be able to end their lives with professional support in an emergency. Out of respect for the independence of the Federal Constitutional Court, the Humanist Association has decided not to publish its own statement for the time being. It is to be hoped that the Federal Constitutional Court will follow the petitions of the complainants and declare § 217 StGB unconstitutional. A decision is expected around the turn of the year.
Further information
- Erwin Kress: “The ban on organized assisted suicide benefits no one, but harms many!”
- “At the end of the road”: Humanist positions and arguments on the assisted suicide debate.
- The Humanist Association of Germany has joined forces with other humanist and secular organizations in the Alliance for Self-Determination until the End of Life.
- Alliance website: www.mein-ende-gehoert-mir.de
