https://doi.org/10.4081/mem.2007.316

Testamento biologico e obiezione di coscienza

V. 56 N. 3 (2007)
Pubblicato: giugno 30, 2007
Testamento biologico, eutanasia, accanimento terapeutico, diritto, consenso informato / Living will, euthanasia, overtreatment, law, informed consent
Abstract Views: 833
PDF: 18
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.

Autori

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
Magistrato, Parlamentare europeo, Italy.
Il presente contributo muove dal considerare come i progetti e i disegni di legge che disciplinano le cosiddette "direttive anticipate di volontà", ne sanciscono il carattere vincolante. Nella stessa direzione procede anche il parere elaborato dalla Commissione Giustizia. Quest'ultima rispetto a tale vincolatività ritiene addirittura "improponibile" e "non accettabile" l'istituto dell'obiezione di coscienza. Gli Autori, invece, sostengono l'importanza della previsione dell'obiezione di coscienza in una normativa sul testamento biologico che voglia "impegnare" il medico ad "ubbidire" alle volontà manifestate anteriormente. La questione si pone con riferimento alle azioni o alle omissioni che possono causare la morte. Il riconoscimento giuridico dell'obiezione di coscienza comporta che quando la legge prevede comportamenti che causano direttamente (ad esempio nel caso dell'aborto volontario) o possono concorrere a causare (ad esempio, per la sospensione/interruzione di trattamenti sanitari) la soppressione della vita umana, il medico può legittimamente non applicarla. D'altra parte non va dimenticata - ricordano gli Autori - la ratio dell'obiezione di coscienza. Poichè il fine dell'organizzazione statale è la difesa della vita umana, il riconoscimento dell'obiezione di coscienza implica anche il riconoscimento della coerenza dell'obiezione stessa con i fini ultimi dello Stato. In tale interpretazione l'esercizio dell'obiezione non è soltanto la salvaguardia della libertà di coscienza, di pensiero e di religione, ma anche lo strumento per mantenere il valore della vita umana.
----------
This contribution, starting from the evaluation of bills on "living will", shows how such "will" confirm their obligatoriness. The opinion elaborated by the Commission of Justice goes on the same way. This one holds such obligatoriness as a solution that absolutely "cannot be proposed" and it holds the objection of conscience as "unacceptable". On the contrary, the Authors support the importance of the provision of the objection of conscience within regulations, on living will, inclined to "bind" the physician to "obey" the will previously manifested. The kernel of the problem is the action or the omission that can cause the death. The legal recognition of the objection of conscience implies that, if the law provides behaviors that directly cause (voluntary abortion for example) or that can assist to cause the suppression of human life (the suspension/withdrawal of medical treatments for example), the physician can legally not to apply it. One should not forget, as the Authors remind us, the ratio of the objection of conscience. Since the aim of the public authority consists in the defense of the human life, the recognition of the objection of conscience implies the recognition of the coherence of this objection with the ultimate aims of the State too. In this interpretation, the use of the objection is not just the protection of the freedom of objection, of thought and religion, but also the instrument to preserve human life value.

Dimensions

Altmetric

PlumX Metrics

Downloads

I dati di download non sono ancora disponibili.

Citations

Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Come citare

Casini, M., Di Pietro, M. L., & Casini, C. (2007). Testamento biologico e obiezione di coscienza. Medicina E Morale, 56(3). https://doi.org/10.4081/mem.2007.316

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.