Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics

, Volume 34, Issue 3, pp 227–238 | Cite as

Euthanasia in psychiatry can never be justified. A reply to Wijsbek



In a recent article, Henri Wijsbek discusses the 1991 Chabot “psychiatric euthanasia” case in the Netherlands, and argues that Chabot was justified in helping his patient to die. Dutch legislation at the time permitted physician assisted suicide when the patient’s condition is severe, hopeless, and unbearable. The Dutch Supreme Court agreed with Chabot that the patient met these criteria because of her justified depression, even though she was somatically healthy. Wijsbek argues that in this case, the patient’s integrity had been undermined by recent events, and that this is the basis for taking her request seriously; it was unreasonable to expect that she could start again. In this paper, I do not challenge the Dutch euthanasia criteria in the case of somatic illness, but I argue that both Chabot and Wijsbek are wrong because we can never be sufficiently confident in cases of severe exogenous depression to assist the patient in her irreversible act. This is partly because of the essential difference between somatic and mental illness, and because of the possibility of therapy and other help. In addition, I argue that Wijsbek’s concept of integrity cannot do the work that he expects of it. Finally, I consider a 2011 position paper from the Royal Dutch Medical Association on euthanasia, and the implications it might have for Chabot-style cases in the future.


Chabot Euthanasia Wijsbek Integrity Depression Grief 


  1. 1.
    Wijsbek, H. 2012. To thine own self be true: On the loss of integrity as a kind of suffering. Bioethics 26(1): 1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Griffiths, J. 1995. Assisted suicide in the Netherlands: The Chabot case. Modern Law Review 58(2): 232–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Huxtable, R., and M. Möller. 2007. Setting a principled boundary? Euthanasia as a response to life fatigue. Bioethics 21(3): 117–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Graham, G. 1990. Melancholic epistemology. Synthese 82: 399–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Klotzko, A.J. 1995. Arlene Judith Klotzko and Dr. Boudewijn Chabot discuss assisted suicide in the absence of somatic illness. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 4: 239–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kissane, D.W. 2004. The contribution of demoralization to end-of-life decision making. Hastings Center Report 34(4): 21–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Applebaum, P.S., and T. Grisso. 1988. Assessing patients’ capacities to consent to treatment. New England Journal of Medicine 319(25): 1635–1638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chochinov, H.M., K.G. Wilson, M. Enns, et al. 1995. Desire for death in the terminally ill. American Journal of Psychiatry 152(8): 1185–1191.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Breitbart, W., B. Rosenfeld, H. Pessin, et al. 2000. Depression, hopelessness, and desire for hastened death in terminally ill patients with cancer. Journal of the American Medical Association 284: 2907–2911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ganzini, L., M.A. Lee, R.T. Heintz, J.D. Bloom, and D.S. Fenn. 1994. The effect of depression treatment on elderly patients’ preferences for life-sustaining medical therapy. American Journal of Psychiatry 151: 1631–1636.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hooper, S.C., K.J. Vaughan, C.C. Tennant, and J.M. Perz. 1996. Major depression and refusal of life-sustaining medical treatment in the elderly. Medical Journal of Australia 165: 416–419.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Royal Dutch Medical Association. 2011. The role of the physician in the voluntary termination of life. Accessed Apr 12 2013.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of PhilosophyUniversity College DublinDublinIreland

Personalised recommendations