法律英語-安樂死-ppt

Euthanasia1234567Ⅰ.WhatisEuthanasiaⅡ.EuthanasiaandCriminalLawⅢ.TypeofEuthanasiaⅣ.IssuesofEuthanasiaⅤ.OpinionsⅥ.TheSituationⅦ.SummaryⅠ.WhatisEuthanasiaPalliativecareisspecialisedcareandsupportprovidedforsomeonelivingwithaterminalillness（晚期病癥）.Importantly,palliativecarealsoinvolvescareandsupportforfamilyandcaregivers（護理者）.Thegoalofpalliativecareistoimprovequalityoflifeforpatients,theirfamiliesandcaregiversbyprovidingcarethataddresses（滿足需求）themanyneedspatients,familiesandcaregivershave:physical(includingtreatmentofpainandothersymptoms),emotional,social,culturalandspiritual.Palliativecareaimstohelpthepatientliveaswellaspossible.1.Whatispalliativecare?

Palliativecareofferssupporttohelpfamilyandcaregiversmanageduringthepatient’sillnessandinbereavement(親人喪亡).Asapersonreceivingpalliativecare,thepatientisanimportantpartnerinplanningtheircareandmanagingtheirillness.Whenpeoplearewellinformed,participateintreatmentdecisionsandcommunicateopenlywiththeirdoctorsandotherhealthprofessionals,theyhelpmaketheircareaseffectiveaspossible.Careplanningisanimportantprocessinensuringthepatient’swishes,inrelationtotheircare,aremet.Patientsshouldspeaktotheirdoctoraboutadvancecareplanningandadvancecaredirectives.2.Whatisagooddeath?

InaGalluppollinAmerica,morethan70%ofindividualssurveyedfeareddyinginpainoralonewithoutthechancetosaygood-bye.Twelveprinciplestoknowwhendeathiscoming,andtounderstandwhatcanbeexpectedtobeabletoretaincontrolofwhathappenstobeaffordeddignityandprivacytohavecontroloverpainreliefandothersymptomcontroltohavechoiceandcontroloverwheredeathoccurs(athomeorelsewhere)tohaveaccesstoinformationandexpertiseofwhateverkindisnecessarytohaveaccesstoanyspiritualoremotionalsupportrequiredtohaveaccesstohospicecareinanylocation,notonlyinhospitaltohavecontroloverwhoispresentandwhosharestheendtobeabletoissueadvancedirectiveswhichensurewishesarerespectedtohavetimetosaygoodbye,andcontroloverotheraspectsoftimingtobeabletoleavewhenitistimetogo,andnottohavelifeprolongedpointlessly3.WhatisEuthanasia?

Euthanasiaistheterminationofaverysickperson'slifeinordertorelievethemoftheirsuffering.Apersonwhoundergoeseuthanasiausuallyhasanincurablecondition.Butthereareotherinstanceswheresomepeoplewanttheirlifetobeended.Inmanycases,itiscarriedoutattheperson'srequestbuttherearetimeswhentheymaybetooillandthedecisionismadebyrelatives,medics（醫(yī)護人員）or,insomeinstances,thecourts.ThetermisderivedfromtheGreekwordeuthanatoswhichmeanseasydeath.Ⅱ.EuthanasiaandCriminalLawThispartjusttalkabouttherelationshipbetweeneuthanasiaandcriminallaw.Thenfindsomereasonableexplanation.1.Thegeneralprovisionsofthecriminallaw（刑法總則）andeuthanasia(1)Thefundamentalprincipleofcriminallawandeuthanasiaandeuthanasia.theprincipleoflegallyprescribedpunishmentforaspecifiedcrime(罪刑法定原則）tellusthatdeemeuthanasiatocrimesisinappropriate.Becausethereisnorelevantprovisionsofcriminallaw.(2)TheBasiccharacteristicsofcrimeandeuthanasia.

crimeSocialharmfulnessDisapprobationpossibility(非難可能性）Comparedwithothermajorcrime，euthanasiahaslesssocialharmfulness.(3)ThepurposeofthecriminallawLegalinterestprotection(保護法益）isthemainpurposeofthecriminallaw.Tosomepoint,euthanasiaindeedviolated(侵犯)theinterestsoftheparty.Fromthisperspective,criminallawshouldbegivenprotection.2、ThespecificprovisionsofcriminallawandeuthanasiaEuthanasiabasicallyinlinewiththecrimeconstitutedintentionallycommitshomicide（故意殺人）.Ithasthesubjectiveintention，andobjectivelyharmfulbehaviorandharmresults.Ⅲ.TypeofEuthanasia

(1)ThefirstkindofclassificationAccordingtotheapplicablespecificobject,euthanasiacanbedividedintospecialeuthanasiaandgeneralizedeuthanasia.Specialeuthanasia:itistopointto,toforkingandinextremepainpatients,ledtotherapiddeathwithoutpainaway.Generalizedeuthanasia:inadditiontoincludingspecialeuthanasiacontent,itstillincludestosomebirthisasheavyresidual,dementiainfant,socialsomeseverepsychotic,severelydisabledpeopleandinirreversiblecomaofthe"vegetable",makethefeelingnopaindeath.(2)Thesecondkindofclassification

Voluntaryeuthanasia,itistopointtopatientswhorequireorhavehaddesire,orsaidthroughtheagreedtoandtaketheeuthanasia.Involuntaryeuthanasia,generallyreferstothoseincapacitatedpatients,namelycannotsayIdemand,desireorconsentofthepatients,accordingtoitsrelativeapplicationandimplementationoftheeuthanasia,suchasforseverelydeformedbabies,braindeathpatients,inacomapatients,mentalpatient,patientswhoseintelligenceisseriouslowperson.(3)ThethirdkindofclassificationAccordingtothedifferentterminalmedicalmeasuresthatthedoctortake,euthanasiacanbedividedintoactiveeuthanasiaandpassiveeuthanasia.Activeeuthanasiacanalsobecalledasthepositiveeuthanasia,referstothemedicalstafftoremoveterminallydyingpatientsdiedprocesspainandtakesomemeasurestohastendeath.Passiveeuthanasiaisalsoknownasnegativeeuthanasia,itistoshowmedicalpersonneltoforkinganddyingpatients,torelievethepain,suspendmaintainitslifecuremeasurestoshortenthepatientsintoirreversibledeathprocessafterthecontinuoustime.

(4)ThefourthkindofclassificationAccordingtothedifferentpropertiesanddegreeofdeathpain,anddifferentmethodsanddegreeofeliminatingthepain,euthanasiacanbedividedintotypeAeuthanasia,typeBeuthanasiaandtypeCeuthanasia.

TypeAeuthanasiaalsocalledmaintenancetherapyinadditiontopaintype,itistopointtoeliminatepain,asusualtreatment.TypeBeuthanasiaalsocalledtogiveuptreatmentinadditiontopaintype,itistopointtoeliminatepain,giveuptreatment.TypeCeuthanasiaalsocalledtogiveuptreatmentsuspendeddeathpaintype,itistopointtoterminatethedeathprocesstorelievepain.根據安樂死可以適用的具體對象，可以將安樂死分為狹義安樂死和廣義安樂死。狹義安樂死，是指對于身患絕癥、處于極度痛苦之中的患者，促使其無痛苦迅速死亡的一種方式。廣義安樂死，除包括狹義安樂死的內容外，還包括對于一些出生時即為重殘、癡呆的嬰幼兒、社會上的一些重度精神病患者、重度殘疾人以及處于不可逆昏迷中的“植物人”，促使其在無痛苦感受中死亡。自愿安樂死，是指患者本人要求，或者有過愿望，或者表示通過同意而采取的安樂死。非自愿安樂死，一般是指對那些無行為能力的患者，即無法表示本人要求、愿望或同意與否的患者，根據其親屬的申請而實施的安樂死，如對有嚴重畸形的嬰兒、腦死亡病人、昏迷不醒病人、精神病人、智力嚴重低下者實施安樂死。根據醫(yī)生對患者采取臨終醫(yī)療措施的不同可以把安樂死分為主動安樂死與被動安樂死。主動安樂死又可稱為積極安樂死，指醫(yī)務人員為解除身患不治之癥的臨終患者死亡過程的痛苦而采取某種措施促使病人死亡。被動安樂死又稱為消極安樂死，是指醫(yī)務人員對身患絕癥而瀕臨死亡的患者，為解除其痛苦，中止維持其生命的醫(yī)治措施以縮短患者進入不可逆死亡過程后所持續(xù)的時間。根據死亡痛苦的不同性質和程度，以及消除痛苦的不同方法和程度，安樂死又可以分為A型安樂死、B型安樂死和C型安樂死。A型安樂死又稱維持治療除痛型，是指消除痛苦，照常治療。B型安樂死又稱放棄治療除痛型，是指消除痛苦，放棄治療。C型安樂死又稱放棄治療中止死亡痛苦型，是指終止死亡過程以解除痛苦。Ⅳ.IssuesofEuthanasiaTheissuehasbeenatthecentreofveryheateddebatesformanyyearsandissurroundedbyreligious,ethical,practicalconsiderationsandsoon.1.ThelegalpositionEuthanasiaisillegalinmostcountries,althoughdoctorsdosometimescarryouteuthanasiaevenwhereitisillegal.EuthanasiaisillegalinBritain.Tokillanotherpersondeliberatelyismurderormanslaughter,eveniftheotherpersonasksyoutokillthem.Anyonedoingsocouldpotentiallyface14yearsinprison.Underthe1961SuicideAct,itisalsoacriminaloffenceinBritain,punishableby14years'imprisonment,toassist,aidorcounselsomebodyinrelationtotakingtheirownlife.Nevertheless,theauthoritiesmaydecidenottoprosecuteincasesofeuthanasiaaftertakingintoaccountthecircumstancesofthedeath.InSeptember2009theDirectorofPublicProsecutionswasforcedbyanappealtotheHouseofLordstomakepublicthecriteriathatinfluencewhetherapersonisprosecuted.Thefactorsputalargeemphasisonthesuspectknowingthepersonwhodiedandonthedeathbeingaone-offoccurrenceinordertoavoidaprosecution.2.Theethicsofeuthanasia

isiteverrighttoendthelifeofaterminallyillpatient

whoisundergoingseverepainandsuffering?underwhatcircumstancescaneuthanasiabejustifiable,ifatall?isthereamoraldifferencebetweenkillingsomeoneandlettingthemdie?Attheheartoftheseargumentsarethedifferentideasthatpeoplehaveaboutthemeaningandvalueofhumanexistence.Shouldhumanbeingshavetherighttodecideonissuesoflifeanddeath?3.practicalissues

Somepeoplethinkthateuthanasiashouldn'tbeallowed,evenifitwasmorallyright,becauseitcouldbeabusedandusedasacover（幌子，偽裝）formurder.KillingorlettingdieEuthanasiacanbecarriedouteitherbytakingactions,includinggivingalethalinjection,orbynotdoingwhatisnecessarytokeepapersonalive(suchasfailingtokeeptheirfeedingtube（喂食管）going).'Extraordinary'medicalcareItisnoteuthanasiaifapatientdiesasaresultofrefusingextraordinaryorburdensomemedicaltreatment（特殊或繁重的藥物治療）4.Religions

issuesDeathisoneofthemostimportantthingsthatreligionsdealwith.Allfaithsoffermeaningandexplanationsfordeathanddying;allfaithstrytofindaplacefordeathanddyingwithinhumanexperience.Forthoseleftbehindwhensomeonediesreligionsprovideritualstomarkdeath,andceremoniestorememberthosewhohavedied.Religionsprovideunderstandingandcomfortforthosewhoarefacingdeath.Religionsregardunderstandingdeathanddyingasvitaltofindingmeaninginhumanlife.Dyingisoftenseenasanoccasionforgettingpowerfulspiritualinsightsaswellasforpreparingforwhateverafterlifemaybetocome.Soit'snotsurprisingthatallfaithshavestrongviewsoneuthanasia.Ⅴ.Opinions1.InfavorofeuthanasiaLegalizationofEuthanasiaBenefits

2134motethedevelopmentofthemedicaltreatmentStillaliveordiedwitheuthanasiaPollsofeuthanasiaAgreeObJectNeutral24％31％45％Nowwecandemonstratedthelegalizationofeuthanasiafromhumannatureandlivingreality:Theformationoftheconceptofhumanrightsisbasedonouremotion.NowIwillsharetwoproverbswithyou.First,“Expendtherespectoftheagedinone’sfamilytothatofotherfamilies;expendtheloveoftheyoungonesinone’sfamilytothatofotherfamilies.”老吾老，以及人之老；幼吾幼，以及人之幼Second,Neverimposeyourbeliefsonanyoneelse己所不欲，勿施于人Thesethoughtscontainthehumanitytothesimilarinstinctivelyemotionrecognitionandrespect.Itisthesublimationofhumanidentityproducedconsciousnessofhumanrights.Itisalsoforthesensethatmadeeuthanasiahasawiderangeofsocialfoundation.Implementationeuthanasiacanreducemedicalburdenandmakethepatientsandtheirrelativesfree.ThevoicesofthepatientsRecentyears,alloverthecountrymadevariouspollsabouteuthanasia.Accordingtostatistics,inBeijing,Shanghai,Heilongjiang,morethan80%oftherespondentsareinfavorofeuthanasia.Andinsomeothercountries,theconsequenceevenachieve90%.“Thepeacefuldeathwasinferiorthatisbarelyexisting”isnolongertheprincipleofsurvival.Thelegalizationofeuthanasia,itisthecommonaspirationofthepeople,isinfavorwiththepublic.

First,confirmthelegalizationofeuthanasia,canreducethepainofpatients.Accordingtotheministryofhealthofthenationalpopulationandtherelevantstatistics,eachyearinourcountrythenumberofpeoplekilledisnearly10million,amongthemmorethan1millionpeopleisgoneinextremepain.Andquitealotofpeopleamongthevictimshaveaskedforeuthanasia,butbecauseoflegalreason,hewasrejectedandultimatediedwithpain,helpless,regret.Inthiscase,whatiseuthanasiaconformstothehumanitarian?Orletthediseaseslowlytorture,swallowthepatient'slifemoreaccordwithhumanitarian?Asthehumanitarianareconcerned,lifemustbeprotected,butwhenapersonisonthevergeofdeathandcannotbetreated.Usingofexistingmedicalconditionsandstrongstrugglearefutile.Atthistime,theprotectionoflifehaslostitsanypracticalsignificance.Carryingouteuthanasiaastheywish,itmaintainthedignityofpersonality,reducethepainofpatients,andavoidthefamilymembersandfriendsandrelativeswatchthedeadpatientssufferingtorture.Itpreferdietolivewhenbornwithhopelessness.Second,confirmthelegalizationofeuthanasia,canreducetheburdenofthefamily.Therelativesofthepatientshavementalresponsibilityandeconomicresponsibilitytothepatients.Inordertobeabletoextendapatient'slife,theyoftenneedtouseexpensivemedicalequipment,paytheheavymaterialprice,whichseverelyreducesthewholefamily'squalityoflife.Thisisexcessiveworthlessrequirements.Atthesametime,euthanasiaisalsobetterforthedeadman'sfamilymembersandrelativesandfriendsrecoveringfromthespiritualpainassoonaspossible.Theycanjoininthenormalstudy,workandlifeforthedemandofsocialdevelopmentquickly.Third,confirmedthelegalizationofeuthanasia,canreducetheburdenofthesociety.Peopleliveinsociety,itisthesocietywhichfinallybeartheliabilityofpatient.Societyhavetheobligationtodistributioncorrespondingresourcestosolveproblems,butthereisnoneedtokeepitsconsumptioninmaintainingthemeaninglessoflife.Atpresent,inChinatherearealotofpoorareaslackingofmedicaltreatment,someoneoftendiedorgotdeformityfornotgetgoodtreatment.So,inlimitedhealthresourcesociety,itshouldbeputtosavethesignificancepatients.

Forth,confirmedthelegalizationofeuthanasia,canpromotethedevelopmentofthemedicaltreatment.Carryingouteuthanasiaforthosewithincurabledisease,medicalpersoncanreleasefrommultifariousandunprofitablejob,makemoreenergytoconquerincurablediseases,givebenefitandfreshhopetootherpatients.Especiallyinthepresentarduousmedicalwork,difficultcircumstancesthatthepatienttoseeadoctor,ithasmorerichpracticalmeaning.Inshort,peopleshouldbehavevalue,dignityandhappinessinlife.Whenaliveisofnovalue,hasbecomeapain,akindofburden,euthanasiaisakindofliberation.Weexpectthedaythateuthanasiabecomelegal.Atthesametimewealsohopelawmakersformulatestandardstrictlawsfromcomprehensiveconsideration,toovercomethenegativeeffectafterthelegalizationofeuthanasia

Ichooseeuthanasia!!!EuthanasiaIntentionalhomicideMotivationgoodVicious(惡意的)Implementingsubject(實施主體)doctoranyoneImplementingobject（實施對象）thepatientwhoisatdeath’sdooranyoneThebearer’ssubjectivedesire(實施對象的主觀愿望)Initiativeandvoluntary;inaclear-mindedheadPassive;notheintentionThewayofbehaviorinakindandpainlesswayundersocialethicalandhumanitarianprinciplesViolenceillegally ImplementingprocesstheauthorizationofLegalnorminaccordancewithLegalprocedureNothelimitationEuthanasiaSuicideImplementingsubjectdoctorhimselfMotivationandreasonphysicalpainmanyindividualreasonsProcedureandrequirementtheauthenticationofLegalnorminaccordancewithLegalprocedurenothelimitationcriminality1.theseriousharmfulness2.object(客體)3.subjective（主觀方面）CONCLUSION:Euthanasiadoesn’thavecriminality.Theeuthanasiaactorsshouldnotbeconvictedastheintentionalkillers.SoI’mfortheeuthanasia.2.AgainsteuthanasiaPeoplev.Kevorkian1.Citation

248Mich.App.373;639N.W.2d2912.Parties

PeopleoftheStateofMichigan,Plaintiff-AppelleeJackKevorkian,Defendant-Appellant

Peoplev.KevorkianFacts

I.overview

Thiscaseisaboutdeath;inparticular,thedeathofformerracecardriverThomasYoukinSeptember1998.Youkwasfiftytwoyearsoldandhadamyotrophiclateralsclerosis(ALS),alsoknownasLouGehrig'sdisease.DefendanttwicevideotapedhimselfinteractingwithYouk.Inthefirstvideotape,defendantwenttoYouk'shometodiscusshiscondition.Peoplev.Kevorkian

Inthesecondvideotape,defendantadministeredalethaldrugtoYouk.Defendantlaterwasaguestonthetelevisionnewsshow60Minutes,duringwhichsegmentsfrombothvideotapeswereshown.Thejurysawthevideotapesandthe60Minutesinterviewatdefendant'strial.Nevertheless,defendantattemptedtopersuadethejurynottoconvicthimbecausethemurderhewaschargedwithcommittingwas,inhisview,a“mercykilling.”

Peoplev.Kevorkian

II.TheDeathOfThomasYouk

A.TheSeptember15,1998,Videotape

OnSeptember15,1998,at9:55p.m.,defendantwenttoYouk’shometodiscussYouk’scondition.Asthevideotapeofthisdiscussionrevealed,defendantstatedthathewasrecordingtheirinteractionin“connectionwitharequestfromThomas[Youk]forhelpin…endinghissuffering.”Youkthendescribedhiscondition.HerecalledthathissymptomsofALSfirstbecameobvioustohimin1994andthathehadbeenconfinedtoawheelchairsince1997.

Peoplev.Kevorkian

BySeptember1998,Youksaid,hecouldnotmovehisleftarmorhislegs,hehadminimaluseofhisrightarm,hehaddifficultyswallowingandbreathing,hewasfedthroughatube,andhewasforcedtouseamachinetohelphimbreathe.Youkstatedthat,atthetime,hecouldnotdoanythingforhimself,thathehaddiscussed“hiswishes”withhismother,brothers,andwife,andthatthey“understandwhy.It'smydecision.”

Peoplev.KevorkianB.TheSeptember16,1998,Videotape

OnSeptember16,1998,at9:49p.m.,defendantagainvideotapedhimselfandYoukatYouk'shome.Youkstatedthathe“wantedtogothroughwiththis”andsignedtheconsentform.DefendantremarkedthathewouldinjectYoukintheveinbecause“it'squicker,”andstated,“nowI'mgoingtoputonacardiogramsoweknowwhenyourheartisstopped,okay.”DefendantestablishedaconnectionbetweenYoukandtheelectrocardiogram.DefendantinjectedYoukwithAnectineandSeconalbeforeinjectingYoukwithpotassiumchloride.Peoplev.Kevorkian

C.CauseOfDeathDr.DragovicfoundthreesignificantdrugsinYouk'sbodilyfluids.First,YoukhadahighlevelofthebarbiturateSeconal,alsoknownasSecobarbital,inhisblood.Second,Dr.DragovicfoundAnectine,aparalyzingmusclerelaxant,presentinYouk'sbodyinanamountthatcouldhavekilledYoukwithinfivetoeightminutesbycausingbraindeath.However,Dr.Dragovicdeterminedthatitwasthethirddrug,potassiumchloride,thatdefendantinjectedintoYoukthatcausedhisdeath.

Peoplev.Kevorkian

D.The60MinutesInterview

NewscorrespondentMikeWallaceintervieweddefendantfor60Minutes.Inthefirstclipfromtheinterviewshowntothejury,Wallacestatedattheoutset,``Youkilledhim.''Defendantresponded:“Idid,butitcouldbeManslaughternotMurder.It'snotnecessarilyMurder.Butitdoesn'tbothermewhatyoucallit.Iknowwhatitis.Thiscouldneverbeacrimeinanysocietywhichdeemsitselfenlightened.”DefendantindicatedthathewasmakinganexampleofYouk.WallacethensuggestedthatYoukwasinitiallyalittlereluctantbecauseYouk“thoughthewasgettingassistedsuicide.”Defendantrepliedthat“thisisbetterthanassistedsuicide,Iexplainedthattohim.It'sbettercontrol.”Peoplev.Kevorkian

Defendantthenreturnedtooneofhismainthemes,saying:Ifyoudon'thavelibertyandselfdetermination,yougotnothing.That'swhatthiscountry'sbuiltonandthisistheultimateself-determinationtodeterminewhenandhowyou'regonnadiewhenyou'resuffering.[Wallace]:Andthosewhosaythat[defendant],Dr.Death,isafanatic?[Defendant]:Zealot.No,notif,sure,youtrytotakealibertyawayandIturnfanatic....I'mfightingforme,Mike,me.ThisisarightIwantwhenI,I'm71,I'llbe71.Youdon'tknowwhat'llhappenwhenyougetolder.Imayendupterriblysuffering.IwantsomecolleaguetobefreetocomeandhelpmewhenIsaythetimehascome.That'swhyI'mfightingfor,me.Nowthatsoundsselfish.Andifithelpseverybodyelse,sobeit.Peoplev.Kevorkian4.IssuesDoseKevorkianhasrighttoactiveeuthanasia?5.HoldingNo.

Peoplev.KevorkianReasoning

RatherthanaskingthecourttoholdthathisactionswerejustifiedunderlegallyacceptabletheoriessuchasaidingYoukinexercisinghisrighttorefusemedicaltreatmentorattemptingtoalleviateYouk’spaininamannerotherthandeathandratherthanaskingthecourttorulethathelegallyassistedinYouk’ssuicide,thedefendanthasspecificallyaskedthecourttolegalizeeuthanasia.

Peoplev.Kevorkian

Thedefendantarguedforthelegalityofeuthanasiaontwoconstitutionalgrounds;however,thecourtthrewoutthedefendant’sNinthAmendmentclaimforfailuretobrieftheissueonappeal.TheFourteenthAmendmentoftheConstitutionprovidesthat“nostateshalldepriveapersonoflife,libertyorpropertywithoutdueprocessoflaw.”TheMichiganConstitutioncounterpartisnearlyidentical.

Peoplev.Kevorkian

AstotheFourteenthAmendmentclaim,thecourtheldthattheconstitutionalrighttoprivacydoesnotincludearighttocommiteuthanasiasothatanindividualcanbefreefromintolerableandirremediablesuffering.Further,a“right”toassistedsuicide“isnotafundamentallibertyinterestprotectedbytheDueProcessClause.”Thecourtstatesthatitsdecisionisdrivenbyalackofmeaningfulprecedentontheissue,

Peoplev.Kevorkianthefactthatexpandingtherighttoprivacytoincludeeuthanasiawouldessentiallytakethedebateoutofthearenasofpublicdebateandlegislativeaction,andthatbyexpandingtherighttoprivacytoincludeeuthanasia,thecourtwouldbeinvolvingthejudiciaryindecidingquestionsbeyonditscapacity,i.e.howmuchpainisrequiredbeforeitbecomesintolerableandirremediable.

ThecaseinChina1986InchinaFirsteuthanasiacaseWangMingchengEuthanizehismother

王明成

CaseA.DetailsXiaSuwen,whowasthedefendant’smother,hadalong-termillness.In1984,shehadbeendiagnosedof“l(fā)iverascites”(肝腹水).Inearly1987,Xia’sconditionaggravated,andshewasoftenuncons-cious.OnJune23,Thedefendant,WangMingchengandhissisteragreedtosendhismothertotheInfectiousDiseasesHospitalinHanzhongcity.Thedefendant,PuLianshengwasthedoctor.Afteradiagnosis,thehospitalissuedanoticeofcriticalcondition.OnJune27,XiaSuwen’sconditionaggravated,shewaspainful,crying,andwantedtodie

.WangMingchengcouldnotbeartoseehismothersopainfully,andaskedPuLianshengtouseadrugtohismotherinordertodiepainlessly.Purefused.

AfterWang’srepeatedrequests，andWangsignedaletterofresponsibility,Puused100mgof“CompoundDongmianling”,andwrited“familyrequested”downontheprescription,Wangsignedhisnameontheprescription.Afterusing75mgof“Compou-ndDongmianling”,Xiawasstillalive.AfterWang’srequest,Puinjected100mgof“CompoundDongmianling”again.Finally,14hourslater,XiaSuwendiedat5:00onJune29.

B.Forensicidentification

ThemaincauseofXiaSuwen’sdeathwashepaticencephalopathy(肝性腦病).Thetotalamountof“CompoundDongmianling”was175mgwhichwasinthenormalrange,and14hourslater,thepatientdied.Ithappenedneitherasuddendropinbloodpressure,norcentralinhibition.So,“CompoundDongmianling”wasnotthedirectcauseofdeath”.C.Viewofthepublicprosecutor

PuLiansheng,asthedoctorof

XiaSuwen,deliberatelyusedthedrugcalled“CompoundDongmianling”toacirrhoticpatienttopromotethedeathofXiaSuwen.Thedefendant,WangMingchenginsistedonpromotinghermother’sdeathwiththeinjectionofthedrugandsignedhisnameonthedoctor’sprescription.Thetwodefendants’(WangMingchengandPoLiansheng)behaviours,hadviolatedtheprovisionofarticle232ofCriminalLawofPRC,constitutedthecrimeofintentionalhomicide.Article232:“Whoeverintentionallycommitshomicidemustbesentencedtodeath,lifeimprisonmentorfixed-termimprisonmentofnotlessthan10years;ifthecircumstancesarerelativelyminor,heshallbesentencedtofixed-termimprisonmentofnotlessthanthreeyearsbutnotmorethan10years.”第二百三十二條：“故意殺人的，處死刑、無期徒刑或者十年以上有期徒刑；情節(jié)較輕的，處三年以上十年以下有期徒刑。”D.Statementofdefense

Thecounselarguedthatthedefendants’(WangLianshengandPuLiansheng)behaviorswerenotrelatedtoXiaSuwen'sdeathdirectly.Theirperformancesdidnothavethefourelementsofthecrime.So,thetwodefendants'conductsdidnotconstituteacrime,shallbedeclaredtobeinnocent.E.Holding

Thedefendant,WangMingcheng,repeatedlyaskedthedoctor,PuLiansheng,toinjectforhismotherwhenhismother,XiaSuwen,wasdying,sothathismothercoulddiedpainlessly.Thoughhedelib-eratelydeprivedoftherighttohismother’slife,butthecircumstancesweresignificantlyminorandtheharmdoneisnotserious,theactshallnotbeconsideredasacrime.TheDefendant,PuLiansheng,personallyprescripedtothepatientandpromotedXiasuWen‘sdeathafterWangMingcheng‘srepeatedrequests.healsodeliberatelydeprivedofcitizen’srighttolife,butthedosagewasnormal,ItwasnotthedirectcausetoXiaSuwen’sdeath,thecircumstancesareobviouslyminor.InaccordancewithArticle13oftheCriminalLawofthePeople'sRepublicofChina,thePeople'sCourtofHanzhongCity,inShanxiProvince,declaredthatthedefendants,PuLianshengandWangMingcheng,wereinnocent.

Article13:“However,ifthecircumstancesareobviouslyminorandtheharmdoneisnotserious,theactshallnotbeconsideredasacrime.”第十三條:“但是