‘The so-called safeguards failed - Belgium violated the right to life’
Tom Mortier had previously been in favour of euthanasia, being in favour of allowing the choice to those who wanted it. Unfortunately, he did not realise how the law would allow his mother, who had severe mental health issues, to be euthanised without his knowledge, and despite the doubts of her long-term treating psychiatrist.
“The big problem in our society is that apparently we have lost the meaning of taking care of each other,” said Tom Mortier.
“My mother had a severe mental problem. She had to cope with depression throughout her life. She was treated for years by psychiatrists and eventually the contact between us was broken. A year later she received a lethal injection. Neither the oncologist who administered the injection nor the hospital had informed me or any of my siblings that our mother was even considering euthanasia. I found out a day later when I was contacted by the hospital, asking me to take care of the practicalities,” he continued.
Belgian law specifies that the person must be in a ‘medically futile condition of constant and unbearable physical or mental suffering that cannot be alleviated, resulting from a serious and incurable disorder caused by illness or accident.’ Tom’s mother was physically healthy, and her treating psychiatrist of more than 20 years did not believe that she satisfied the legal requirements of the Belgian euthanasia law. Nonetheless, she was euthanized in 2012 by an oncologist with no known psychiatric qualifications.
The same doctor who euthanized Tom’s mother co-chairs the Federal Commission which reviews euthanasia cases to ensure the law has been respected. He also leads a pro-euthanasia organization which received a payment from Tom Mortier’s mother in the weeks preceding her death. Despite all this, according to the Belgian government, the Federal Commission voted “unanimously” to approve the euthanasia in this case.
When Tom took his case to the European Court of Human Rights, he prevailed with the following judgement.
European Court of Human Rights rules that Belgium failed to conduct proper investigation into circumstances of the 2012 euthanasia of Godelieva de Troyer
While judgment dismissed challenge to Belgium’s euthanasia legal framework, the facts of the case send clear warning about the dangers of euthanasia and the fiction of legal ‘safeguards’
The so-called ‘safeguards’ failed because intentional killing can never be safe.