El deber de proteger la vida, y especialmente de los más debilitados, frente a un inexistente derecho a quitarse la vida por sí o por otros
European Court of Human Rights, interpreting the rights to personal autonomy and life, has only found a basis in the first without injuring the second in the voluntary and free option for therapeutic abstention or against artificial life support, under certain conditions. In a ruling of February 26,...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | Spanish |
| Published: |
2021
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/oaiart?codigo=8044156 |
| Source: | Revista española de derecho constitucional, ISSN 0211-5743, Año nº 41, Nº 122, 2021, pags. 47-83 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags: Be the first to tag this record
|
| Summary: |
European Court of Human Rights, interpreting the rights to personal autonomy and life, has only found a basis in the first without injuring the second in the voluntary and free option for therapeutic abstention or against artificial life support, under certain conditions. In a ruling of February 26, 2020, the German Constitutional Court has misrepresented this European jurisprudential doctrine, which in Spain has a quasi-constitutional value and is convergent with case-law so far emanated from its Constitutional Court. A such similar doctrine derives from the Supreme Court of United States of America. Three main considerations back this doctrine: the freedom that is proper to the dignity of every human person does not include eliminating it, no one can kill another except for proportionate legitimate defense, and there is a social and State duty to protect any life. |
|---|