https://doi.org/10.4081/mem.2007.329

Profili storici del dibattito italiano sul testamento biologico ed esame comparato dei disegni di legge all'esame della XII Commissione (Igiene e Sanità) del Senato

Vol. 56 No. 1 (2007)
Published: February 28, 2007
Testamento biologico, eutanasia, accanimento terapeutico, diritto, consenso informato / Living will, euthanasia, overtreatment, law, informed consent
Abstract Views: 608
PDF (Italiano): 13
Publisher's note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Authors

Marina Casini
marina.casini@rm.unicatt.it
Ricercatore, Italy.
Maria Luisa Di Pietro
Professore associato di Bioetica, Istituto di Bioetica, Facoltà di Medicina e Chirurgia "A. Gemelli", Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Roma, Italy.
Carlo Casini
Professore associato di Bioetica, Istituto di Bioetica, Facoltà di Medicina e Chirurgia "A. Gemelli", Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Roma, Italy.
Il contributo prende in esame gli otto disegni di legge sul c.d. "testamento biologico" in discussione presso la XII Commissione (Igiene e Sanità) del Senato. L'analisi è condotta a partire sia dalle vicende che hanno portato al dibattito attuale, sia dall'indicazione delle varie proposte di legge che si sono succedute dalla XIII legislatura . Vengono così richiamati: l'iniziativa per la diffusione della "Biocard", la Convenzione di Oviedo del 1997 ratificata nel 2001, il "caso Englaro", il "Rapporto Oleari", il parere del Comitato Nazionale per la Bioetica sulle dichiarazioni anticipate di trattamento, il "caso Welby". Queste vicende aiutano a cogliere la ratio e la portata dei disegni di legge in oggetto. La parte centrale dell'articolo riguardante i profili di convergenza e di divergenza delle normative in discussione è seguita dall'indicazione degli elementi di criticità relativi al testamento biologico così come disciplinato nei disegni di legge. La valutazione di tali elementi riguardanti aspetti tutt'altro che secondari circa problematiche di fine vita, porta alla seguente considerazione: sebbene il "testamento biologico" venga presentato come semplice strumento di "allargamento" del consenso/dissenso informato che nulla ha a che vedere con l'eutanasia, in realtà questo strumento si offre come veicolo per introdurre nell'ordinamento giuridico logiche eutanasiche, favorendo pratiche di abbandono delle persone fragili e, dunque, incoraggiando scelte rinunciatarie. A questo punto si impone una domanda: di quale "autodeterminazione" si tratta?
----------
This paper examines the eight bills concerning the so-called "living will" discussed by the XII Commission (Health and Hygiene Committee) of the Senate. The analysis is based both on the events that prompted the current discussion, and on the information of the various legal proposals that have developed since the 13th legislature. The essay discusses: the initiative for the diffusion of the "Biocard," the 1997 Oviedo Convention ratified in 2001, the "Englaro case," the "Oleari Report," the opinion of the National Commission for Bioethics concerning prior declarations with regard to treatment, the "Welby case." These events help explain the reasoning and the range of the bills involved. The central part of the article focuses on the converging and diverging profiles of the norms being discussed. This is followed by a demonstration of the critical elements relating to the biological will as they are understood in the bills. The evaluation of such elements regarding aspects of primary importance concerning end-of-life issues leads to the following consideration: although the "living will" is being presented simply as a means of "enlarging" informed consent/dissent, which has nothing to do with euthanasia, in reality, this "enlarging" introduces into the legal sphere arguments for euthanasia, thus favoring ways of abandoning fragile persons and, consequently, encouraging them to give up. At this point a question arises: what is "self determination"?

Dimensions

Altmetric

PlumX Metrics

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Citations

Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

How to Cite

Casini, M., Di Pietro, M. L., & Casini, C. (2007). Profili storici del dibattito italiano sul testamento biologico ed esame comparato dei disegni di legge all’esame della XII Commissione (Igiene e Sanità) del Senato. Medicina E Morale, 56(1). https://doi.org/10.4081/mem.2007.329

PAGEPress has chosen to apply the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0) to all manuscripts to be published.

An Open Access Publication is one that meets the following two conditions:

  1. the author(s) and copyright holder(s) grant(s) to all users a free, irrevocable, worldwide, perpetual right of access to, and a license to copy, use, distribute, transmit and display the work publicly and to make and distribute derivative works, in any digital medium for any responsible purpose, subject to proper attribution of authorship, as well as the right to make small numbers of printed copies for their personal use.
  2. a complete version of the work and all supplemental materials, including a copy of the permission as stated above, in a suitable standard electronic format is deposited immediately upon initial publication in at least one online repository that is supported by an academic institution, scholarly society, government agency, or other well-established organization that seeks to enable open access, unrestricted distribution, interoperability, and long-term archiving.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.