Paola Roldán is a very brave woman; Since August 2020, he has been suffering from amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), an incurable neuromotor disease, a progressive, irreversible degenerative disease, and today he depends on a ventilator, but he has not lost his mental capacity. It demands that the Constitutional Court recognize their right to a dignified death, decriminalize the euthanasia procedure and the actions of medical assistance to exercise that right.
The right to a dignified death was established by the German Constitutional Court under the auspices of human dignity, recognizing the existence of a person’s right to self-determination to manage his life, according to his own decisions, without being forced into painful ways of life that are irreconcilable with his image of himself. On the basis of this reasoning, that Court established that the protection of the right to life is simultaneously constitutionally compatible with the right to die in dignified conditions.
The Court of Colombia (Case C-239 of 1997), based on this same right to self-determination of people, ruled that forcing a person to live enduring all kinds of pain and suffering, in conditions it considers incompatible with their dignity, is Incompatible with the legal system, which is why he authorized that the state must respect the decision of the patient who wants to die in a dignified way, as long as there is a previous, free and informed consent, in the face of a serious or incurable disease that causes unbearable pain, incompatible with their idea of dignity.
In evolution, said the Colombian court (Sentence C-164/22) recognized medically assisted suicide, distinguishing it from euthanasia, since in the first case it is the patient who administers the medicine that will cause death, and in the second case it is the doctor who gives drugs in the same circumstances. Both figures are recognized as constitutional under strict verification rules.
There are issues that need to be regulated, among others, whether these rights also apply to minors and who gives consent in such cases; also ethical committee of medical centers and procedural protocol; respecting the conscientious objection of doctors who do not want to participate; drugs that can be used.
The constitutional jurisprudence of several countries agrees that medical assistance to a person who, suffering intensely from a diagnosed serious illness, in accordance with his clear conviction, ends such suffering by causing his own death, should not be prohibited. considered a crime. They also believe that this medical assistance must seek the most humane possible conditions in the use of technical knowledge in order to guarantee that the patient will maintain his dignity until the last moment.
Will Paola’s battle leave this legacy? Only the Constitutional Court will say that. I leave her this message of admiration for her fight, for what she believes in and for her decision. (OR)
Source: Eluniverso
Mario Twitchell is an accomplished author and journalist, known for his insightful and thought-provoking writing on a wide range of topics including general and opinion. He currently works as a writer at 247 news agency, where he has established himself as a respected voice in the industry.
