NationStates Jolt Archive

This modified version of an idea I started a while ago hasn't been submitted yet. I'm wondering what improvements or changes delegates would want to see that would make them endorse this kind of bill.

--------------------------
Euthanasia Protection Act
************
A resolution to restrict civil freedoms in the interest of moral decency.
Strength = mild
************
While RECOGNIZING the important advances made by United Nations Resolution #43: Legalize Euthanasia, this bill promotes the self-determination of all patients who are to undergo a mercy killing.

RECOGNIZING that Article 5 of the Universal Bill of Rights -- Resolution #26 -- states that all humans beings must not be subject to inhuman treatment.

RECOGNIZING that an act of Euthanasia without clear consent of the patient is a direct violation of the basic human rights of the patient.

REQUESTS that the following actions be taken to protect patients from an unwanted euthanasia:

1. All nations require a document signed by the patient confirming the patient's wish for euthanasia before any procedure is to begin.
2. In the case that the patient is unable to produce a signature or any other verifiable form of consent, two (2) documents that confirm the patient's wish for euthanasia must be presented and approval by a certified medical official.
3. The clause of Resolution #43 which states that

"In the case of a freak situation in which a person has no serious illness or is over a certain age, if the person cannot make the decision themselves it would be made by those closest to them on the basis of professional medical advice. "

shall be declared NULL and void.

---------------------------------



Let me know what else needs to be here/what shouldn't be here.

Matthias Betsworth
UN Delegate of the Allied States of New Larson

I don't believe that this is legal due to the fact that you can't repeal part of a resolution.

For a clear and precise overhaul of the previous resolutions, I would recommend my colleague to refer to this link as a reference in drafting the next euthenasia bill (i.e. assistance to voluntary terminate life)

http://www.nt.gov.au/lant/parliament/committees/rotti/serial67.pdf

In particular, my colleague can take note of PART 3 - RECORDS AND REPORTING OF DEATH in the drafting of his/her resolution.

Again, we would like to take this opportunity to thank you for consulting VHC.

Yours truly,

Coemhghin Gryllus Aesculapius
Founder of the Commonwealth of Ianuarius
UN representative of the Commonwealth of Ianuarius
Commonwealth of Ianuarius
Founder of VHC (Valetudinarium Healthcare Consortium)
NationStates

True to its name (Valetudinarium [L.] for hospital), the Valetudinarium Healthcare Consortium (VHC) provides other nations with health care system and policy conceptualization, design, implementation, administration, finance, delivery, logistical support, education and research and development all in one package. As the major empolyer in all of our Nation-Associates, our populance chiefly consists of physicians, researchers, health economists, epidemiologists, bioinformaticians, pharmacists, nurses, dentists, optomitrists, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, other allied health professionals, not to mention constitution, litigation and patent-law lawyers! The VHC can provide the expertise your nations need on-the-fly as part of our health care system designer package.

I don't believe that this is legal due to the fact that you can't repeal part of a resolution.

Hmm... the core idea of this bill isn't to repeal part of Resolution 43 as much as it is to redefine the times when euthanasia is allowed. I can reword the proposal so that it redefines instead of repealing if that solves the problem.