Forensic-psychiatric and medico-legal challenges in euthanasia and assisted suicide for patients with mental disorders: balancing autonomy, vulnerability, and professional responsibility
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 23, 2026

Using Visual and Narrative Methods to Achieve Fair Process in Clinical Care
Published on: February 16, 2011
Dalila Tripi1, Mario Giantesani1, Jan Francesco Arena2
1Department of Human Neurosciences, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Background:
Euthanasia and assisted suicide (EAS) in individuals with mental disorders represents a complex and controversial area at the intersection of clinical practice, bioethics, and medico-legal evaluation. While suffering is inherently subjective in both psychiatric and somatic conditions, psychiatric contexts are characterized by greater fluctuation, contextual dependence, and prognostic uncertainty, which complicate the assessment of its severity, persistence, and potential reversibility in medico-legal evaluations.
Methods:
A structured narrative review of the international literature was conducted, focusing on clinical, ethical, and medico-legal aspects of EAS in psychiatric contexts. Regulatory frameworks and empirical contributions were analyzed to identify key domains and areas of ongoing debate.
Results:
Five interconnected domains emerge as central to psychiatric EAS assessment: decision-making capacity, irremediability of suffering, subjective suffering and voluntariness, and safeguard systems. Across jurisdictions, considerable variability exists in legal models and clinical approaches, although a shared emphasis on repeated, multidisciplinary, and well-documented evaluation processes is evident. Persistent challenges include the absence of standardized criteria for irremediability, inter-rater variability in capacity assessment, and the difficulty of distinguishing between psychopathology-related suicidality and well-considered requests for assisted death.
Discussion:
The available literature suggests that psychiatric EAS requires particularly careful and structured evaluation processes, given the inherent complexity and variability of mental disorders. Multidisciplinary approaches involving clinical psychiatry, forensic psychiatry, and legal medicine may contribute to improving consistency, transparency, and medico-legal robustness. Longitudinal assessment and detailed reconstruction of clinical history appear to be key elements in supporting reliable decision-making.
Conclusions:
Psychiatric EAS remains an evolving and methodologically challenging topic. While uncertainties cannot be fully resolved, structured and multidisciplinary evaluation processes may help enhance the consistency and ethical sustainability of assessments in this context.
Related Concept Videos
Ethical Dilemmas II
Ethical Issues
Ethical Concerns in Healthcare:
Ethical Dilemmas I
Let us explore some examples to understand the potentially complex moral decisions nurses face.
Take the case of caring for minors, particularly in areas related to reproductive...
Psychosurgery
Historical Development of Psychosurgery
In the 1930s, Portuguese neurologist Antonio Egas Moniz introduced a surgical procedure designed...
Ethics and Bioethics
Standards of Care II
