Act "late-life" position on the field by Marco Rejected, 03.08.2011, http://labussolaquotidiana.it
On March 7, was launched at the House of Representatives debate on design law (bill) on the so-called "end-life" ie "Measures of the therapeutic alliance, informed consent and advance directives for treatment (DAT).
On 1 March, the Social Affairs Committee of the House had instructed the draftsman Domenico Di Virgilio to bring the measure in the classroom with the votes of the People of Freedom (PDL), Lega Nord and Centre Union (UDC ), against the Democratic Party (PD) and Italy of Values \u200b\u200b(IDV). Alliance for Italy (API) had failed and Future and Freedom (FLI) was not present to vote.
the "lower house" on the bill "living will" then arrived after more than Two years into the parliamentary, which began Feb. 9, 2009 with the death, after discontinuation of hydration and nutrition assistance, to Eluana.
In March 2009, the bill, Sen. Raffaele Calabrò rapporteur, was approved in the Senate and then slow down dramatically, however, his path to House.
If you pass through this room, the text should also return to the Senate since its text (supervisors) has been changed from that (Calabria) at the time approved by the "upper house".
The vote at the text under discussion in the House has now slipped to April, maybe even the highlight of any difference of positions within the government majority that supports the bill.
the nodal points
Remember, however, the Italian legal system provides for and punishes the crime of assisted suicide and murder of consent, the bill Di Virgilio highlights:
that nutrition and hydration are not considered treatment, as provided in the bill Calabrò but may be suspended if they prove to be more effective in providing the patient the nutritional factors were necessary or even damage it.
that the law is not directed only to patients in a vegetative state, but also to those who are "permanent inability to understand information about health care and its consequences."
which are valid only Dat expressed in the manner prescribed by law: that is written or typed with the signature of the patient. They are therefore excluded posthumous video or reconstructions.
Dat that are not binding, leaving the final decision to the doctor: if the signing of Dat disease had occurred at the time of scientific progress, the doctor could not use them. There will be no office dedicated to collecting the rest of the Dat.
that patients in a vegetative state will be guaranteed hospital care, residential or home care provided in the basic levels of assistance.
that if a patient fails to appoint a trustee to liaise with the doctor, his duties will be fulfilled by the family in the order provided by the Civil Code.
The opposite of "yes" sees in a concrete way bill to curb the excesses of euthanasia possible and probable in the country. in the absence of clear legislation.
The front of the "no", composed of Catholics and non-Catholics, is, however, heterogeneous, and includes:
who - in a variety of positions dell'autoderminazione be the beginning of the patient to positive promotion of a culture in favor of euthanasia - opposing the bill because it recognizes the intention of the advocates and judges antieutanasista negatively;
those opposing the bill because it does not see you enough and reflected antieutanasistiche guaranteed positions, including the intentions of its proponents.
The "yes" would therefore positive legislation to regulate the end-life, while the "no" - and for reasons mirror opposites, then irreducible in principle but not the bottom line - argue for a "legislative vacuum" gap which leaves unchanged the status quo.
Inside the 'no', in fact, those who maintain open positions or even filoeutanasiste, believes that the "legislative vacuum" is capable, in litigation, solutions virtually impossible in the case of approval of the law, while those who maintain positions antieutanasiste considered unacceptable in principle, the positive action of the legislature in such delicate matters as the end life-and in fact worse, on every active form than the holiday rules.
The front of Catholics and others opposed to euthanasia in all its forms is then united by a common inspiration to defend the right to life from conception to natural death, but divided on the means best suited to achieve that scopo, segnatamente il ddl in discussione alla Camera.
LA CHIESA ITALIANA
Intervistato da Andrea Tornielli su il Giornale del 27 febbraio, il cardinal Angelo Bagnasco, presidente della Conferenza Episcopale Italiana, ha affermato: «La legge che sta per essere discussa alla Camera non è una legge “cattolica”. Semplicemente rappresenta un modo concreto per governare la realtà e non lasciarla in balia di sentenze che possono a propria discrezione emettere un verdetto di vita o di morte. I malati terminali rischierebbero di essere preda di decisioni altrui». Secondo the head of the Italian bishops' clear that nutrition and hydration are not treatments, but for all vital functions, healthy and sick, is the sense of care and human pose an insurmountable limit, beyond which everything is possible '.
OPPOSING FRONTS
in favor of the law is the MEP Carlo Casini, president of the Movement for Life (MPV), as it considers a mistake to assume the current legal system is a defense against euthanasia by the rules of the Penal Code. Speaking The Gazette on 25 February and 3 March Avvenire Casini said that after the Court of Cassation (civil Sect. I, No. 21748 of October 16, 2007) the requirements of Articles 579 and 580 of the Penal Code do not claim more than is prohibited the killing of a person with his consent, therefore, that this rule applies except where the death is caused by the failure by the person if it is in a state of incapacity and will and conceivable his willingness to die by looking at its "lifestyle", even going back many years before.
To those who argue the irrelevance of the decision of the Supreme Court in its criminal jurisdiction, Casini recalled storage, January 11, 2010, a complaint filed on Eluana case to criminal court. And that Mario Riccio, the doctor who caused the death of Piergiorgio Welby in 2006, was acquitted in criminal proceedings.
is also incorrect - adds the president of MPV - define the bill Di Virgilio "living will" (TB) since the term "advance directives for treatment (DAT) is the result (come December 18, 2003 ) of a long battle within the National Committee for Bioethics fought to indicate an appropriate vehicle to continue the therapeutic alliance between doctor and patient, if the second fall in a state of incapacity. The difference, says Casini, is profound. The essence of TB is the binding nature of the will of the patient, while the essence of Dat is its opposite: the orientation experienced by the patient should be considered without binding to the doctor. TB is the assumption that the availability of life condition of DAT his unavailability.
Contrary to the argument euthanasia bill is supported in an exemplary way by Stefano Rodota, president of the guarantor for the protection of personal data by the chairman of the 2005th 1997al Coordination Group of Trustees for the right to privacy Union Europe from 1998 to 2002. According Rodotà the binding nature of what he has written the person capable of discernment when it becomes incapable is a way of ensuring equality between people.
equally against, but for reasons diametrically opposed, are Alessandro Gnocchi and Mario Palmaro that, in an article in The Gazette on 23 February 20 111 (proximate cause, moreover, the intervention of the mess same day), the law defines a "dramatic own goal, a classic example of heterogenesis ends. The enemies want euthanasia e dell’abbandono terapeutico, ma approvandola faranno il gioco proprio della trasversale “compagnia della buona morte” cui si oppongono. Questo colossale paralogismo ha due radici fondamentali: un errore di ordine tecnico giuridico, e un difetto di dialogo interno al mondo cattolico stesso. Dopo la vicenda Englaro, con il suo contorno di decisioni della magistratura, molti sostengono che non vi sarebbero più dubbi: ci vuole una legge sul cosiddetto “fine vita”». Gnocchi e Palmaro affermano che «il nostro ordinamento continua ad avere un presidio molto solido contro l’eutanasia e l’abbandono terapeutico nelle norme del codice penale regolarmente in vigore, soprattutto gli articoli sull’omicidio del consenting and instigation to commit suicide. Some judges, for more civil and not criminal, have taken measures that ignore this profile. But then it was precisely on the ground and judicial powers of the judiciary which was to lead the battle, fighting the "creative sentences" and the censoring forcing togate.
Furthermore, continued, "Even if the text on Dat question is not overturned, it means the formal recognition by the law of the effectiveness and validity of living wills. It contains more gray areas that go far beyond the principle of patient autonomy. If you really wanted a law vote, he had only one made of a single article, which prohibits the suspension of nutrition and hydration to persons incapable. "
favorable treatment.
Yet contrary to the bill, which judges messed up, is Giuliano Ferrara, editor of Il Foglio that on March 4 that has hosted a joint intervention, although for different reasons, Walter Veltroni.
CATHOLICS FOR THE "YES"
future of the newspaper of the CEI, sided in favor of the bill. In an editorial published on the front page of the March 4, Antonio Gambino remember that those of Welby and Englaro have been cases of "passive euthanasia" which are "allowed in our system." This shows that "the legitimacy of individual behavior to the point the judges decide, not the theoretical system" and made "the weakest point on the case Englaro is daily filling in two ways, one judicial, the other administrative matters." So "it is painfully easy to predict that from here we will have little other rulings that legitimize" living will "and subsequent events of passive euthanasia, strong that even the weak point of the reconstruction of the will of the unconscious patient is healed by the statements expressed early support or administrator in the 'communal'. Moreover, says the bishops 'newspaper,' is just as easy to think that if this date has not yet happened is because, being a law pending in this respect, it acted as a deterrent. But it is clear that if you decide to store this law, the Italian legal system as a whole would provide the elements mentioned to enable the Court to accept other cases of euthanasia requests. From what we understand, says Future, 'because the champions of self-determination, mostly lawyers and lawyers have seized on the bill pending in the House a big step backwards compared to what can be achieved today in the courtroom. And you can see why criticize the bill as hard as possible and aim to make it run aground. "
Catholic writer and journalist Antonio Socci, Available on March 5, was also deployed in support of the bill demanding the approval of the text as it is today, that is inclusive of Paragraph 6 of ' Article 4 which states that in an emergency and the immediate life-threatening Dat does not apply. Rescue workers who provide first aid must in fact thinking to provide immediate care to revive the patient, not to consult his "living will" lose valuable time that can even be fatal. Moreover, without a law to that effect, says Socci, a patient who was saved but remains disabled could sue for damages to those who avoided the death by bringing dangerously rescuers to wonder whether, if necessary, it is not better let the patient die rather than intervene.
THE POSITIONS OF THE PARTIES
The PDL supports the bill.
Il Pd è contrario. Il suo segretario, Perluigi Bersani, definisce quella in discussione alla camera una «legge che non è matura». Dello stesso avviso è la componente cattolica dei Democratici, guidata da Giuseppe Fioroni, attestata sul principio “meglio nessuna legge” di quella proposta dal Pdl.
L’Udc ha già dichiarato il proprio sostegno, ma presenterà alcuni emendamenti “migliorativi” del testo. Il Sottosegretario alla Salute Eugenia Roccella, favorevole al ddl, non esclude che la maggioranza di governo potrebbe convergere su di essi.
Anche l’Api vincola il sostegno del ddl all’approvazione di alcuni correttivi.
L’Idv è risolutamente contraria e presenterà una mozione di minoranza nonché la pregiudiziale di costituzionalità. Quest’ultima è annunciata anche dai Radicali che, assieme all’Associazione Luca Coscioni e alla Lista Bonino-Pannella, intendono portare il dissenso in piazza.
Fli proverà la strada della presentazione di un emendamento unico che riscrive completamente il provvedimento, cercando d’intervenire nei punti nodali relativi alle terapie e al fatto che le Dat non sono vincolanti. 
0 comments:
Post a Comment