In an October 4 judgment, Europe's highest human rights court has ruled that Belgium violated the right to life in the 2012 euthanasia of Godelieva de Troyer, who died by lethal injection at age 64. Her diagnosis? "Incurable depression," and otherwise good physical health.
Ten years later, the European Court of Human Rights has ruled in Mortier v. Belgium, laying bare the extreme dangers of legalized euthanasia. The Court held that Belgium's Federal Commission for the Control and Evaluation of Euthanasia lacked independence, constituting a violation of de Troyer's right to life under the European Convention on Human Rights. The facts of the case, and now the judgment, make clear that no amount of "safeguards" can protect human rights against the horrors of this deadly practice.
Godelieva de Troyer was physically healthy. Nonetheless, her life was ended by an oncologist with no known psychiatric qualifications. Her son, Tom Mortier, a Belgian university lecturer, previously had not taken a position on Belgium's euthanasia laws. That changed when his wife received a call from the hospital—Tom's mother's belongings needed to be picked up. She had been euthanized.
Belgian law specifies that to qualify for euthanasia, 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 struggled with depression, but who among us would want this to be classified as "medically futile"? Even Godelieva's physician of more than 20 years expressed doubts that she met the legal criteria for euthanasia. After all, the practice of psychiatry is predicated on the fundamental premise that there is always hope with the right treatment and support. How can we come to the conclusion that someone is so depressed as to be "incurable" and thereby warrants death?
Despite finding a violation of the right to life, the court failed to rule that there is anything wrong with Belgium's legal framework for euthanasia—a reflection of the tight grip of the postmodern idolization of radical personal autonomy. Paradoxically, the court gave a nod to the importance of euthanasia "safeguards," while at the same time concluding that such laws and protocols entirely failed in this case.
Unfortunately, this is but one visible example of the thousands of cases—most of which go unseen—demonstrating that legal checks can never be sufficient to mitigate the dangers of euthanasia. Belgium, which has the most permissive euthanasia regime in the world, should offer a stark warning for all jurisdictions considering legalizing death-by-choice. Euthanasia destroys far more than just the life at the receiving end of a lethal injection. It sets in motion mass societal disregard for human life, with perilous consequences for us all, and in particular, for the vulnerable.
According to data from Belgian authorities, more than 27,000 people have died from euthanasia in Belgium since it was legalized 20 years ago. Demonstrating that there is an inevitable "slippery slope," Belgium has recently become the first and only country in the world to have no lower age limit on the euthanasia of children. Chillingly, in 2021, almost one in five people euthanized in Belgium were not expected to die naturally in the near future.
In a shocking conflict of interest, the same doctor who euthanized Tom's mother heads the federal commission that reviews euthanasia in Belgium for legal compliance. This commission voted "unanimously" to approve Godlieva's euthanasia. The doctor also leads a pro-euthanasia organization that received a donation from his patient prior to her death.
Americans should do everything in their power to prevent the United States from following this horrifying path. Fortunately, in a case filed by Alliance Defending Freedom, a federal district court recently ruled that a California law likely violates the First Amendment rights of medical professionals in requiring them to participate in physician-assisted suicide against their religious convictions and professional ethics. As the lawsuit continues, it behooves the U.S. to look at the frightening state of affairs in Belgium and countries on similar trajectories, which demonstrate the dark reality that unfolds when the state sanctions killing in the name of medicine.
True dignity is about respecting human life, including at its most vulnerable. It's about caring for each other when we're in need of help. There's nothing praiseworthy about a society that encourages the vulnerable to end their lives. Americans, take note of this important judgment from across the Atlantic. "Safeguards" can never render euthanasia safe.
Robert Clarke, Barrister and Deputy Director of ADF International, served as lead counsel on Mortier v. Belgium. Follow him on Twitter @Rob_ADFIntl.
The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.
Uncommon Knowledge
Newsweek is committed to challenging conventional wisdom and finding connections in the search for common ground.
Newsweek is committed to challenging conventional wisdom and finding connections in the search for common ground.
About the writer
To read how Newsweek uses AI as a newsroom tool, Click here.
