History of euthanasia

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article or section needs to be revised. Details should be given on the talk page. Please help to improve it , and then remove this flag.

The history of euthanasia as a term in Germany is strongly influenced by the time of National Socialism , whose murders under the pretext of “ racial hygiene ” were also called euthanasia ( ancient Greek εὐθανασία euthanasía “pleasant death”; cf. also the terms “ euthanasia ” and “ Ars moriendi “).

Etymology and Ancient Understanding

In ancient Greece - as in other cultures - a distinction was made between two types of death: a death that is "at the time", such as sleep (Hypnos) , and a premature death ( Thanatos , the "twin brother" of Hypnos ), who rips people from life ( ker ). The term “euthanasia” originally referred to the “thanatos” death.

The word euthanasia is found only once in classical Greek. About Menander is reported to have used the word εὐθάνατος (euthánatos, a beautiful death ) needed. “Good death” is characterized as “easy death”, as death without a preceding long illness, also as death that occurs relatively quickly. For the Greek poet Kratinos , the word εὐθανάτως (euthanáthos, beautiful / easily dying ) is passed down to denote a “good death” as opposed to a difficult death. The verb εὐθανατεῖν (euthanathéin) means to die an easy death , but also to die a glorious (or honorable) death (corresponding to the adverb εὖ good used as a prefix ). For Socrates (approx. 469–399 BC) euthanasia means the right preparation for death that is closely linked to a sensible lifestyle. In contrast, infanticide and euthanasia were not referred to as “euthanasia”. The Latin historian Suetonius reports in his biography of the Emperor Augustus that every time he heard of someone's painless death, he wanted a similar euthanasia for himself and his family.

Medical history cannot confirm with certainty how euthanasia was practiced in ancient times. Plato was of the opinion that medical treatment should be stopped for sick people with a lack of vitality, since such help is useless and even harms the state. In addition, one reads in the Hippocratic Oath of the prohibition for doctors to administer lethal drugs, which allows conclusions to be drawn about a corresponding practice. In the case of women, children, slaves and foreigners, euthanasia (in the meaning of the 20th century) may have taken place because they were not seen as full citizens and therefore were rather neglected in terms of health.

Modern times

The meaning in the sense of euthanasia is indicated for the first time by Francis Bacon (1561–1626). In his work Euthanasia medica he takes up the ancient word again and distinguishes between euthanasia interior , the mental preparation for death, and euthanasia exterior , which is supposed to make the end of life easier and more painless for the suffering person, if necessary accepting a shortening of the Life. The ancient meaning of an easy death was still in the foreground, as can be seen from Zedler's Universal Lexicon (published 1732–54):

Euthanasia: a very easy and minor death, which happens without painful convulsions. The word comes from ευ, benewohl, and θανατος, mors, the death (Volume 08, p. 1150)

The concept of “euthanasia” in the original sense of alleviating dying goes back to the medical historian Karl Friedrich Heinrich Marx - with reference to Bacon as a philosophical pioneer. According to Marx, the doctor has the moral task of making the dying easier for the dying person through encouragement, support and medicinal mitigation (from the 17th century also called euthanasia medicinalis ). Such “death relief” corresponded to the zeitgeist of the time, but it was first included in the medical canon of medical duties by Marx. Marx also emphasized the separation of theological pastoral care of the sick from psychological attention and (medicinal) care by the doctor.

In contrast to euthanasia, the terms “dysthanasia (medica)” and “kakothanasia” can be found in the 18th and 19th centuries.

19th and 20th centuries

At the end of the 19th century, the collaboration of representatives of eugenic , racial and social Darwinian perspectives with doctors and natural scientists led to a fundamental change in the classification, questions and understanding of euthanasia.

1836 proclaimed z. B. Christoph Wilhelm Hufeland still that it is the primary task of a doctor to maintain life even with incurable diseases. If the doctor once believed he was entitled to decide on the necessity of a life, insignificant influences were sufficient to apply the worthlessness of a human life to other cases.

In 1859, Charles Darwin, in his work On the Origin of Species through Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Existence, already started from the thesis that the planless and directionless variation of nature is only determined by a "natural" selection Direct lanes. The struggle for existence (term from Thomas Robert Malthus ) is inevitable because of the high number of offspring in nature. Only those variants of individuals who are best able to cope with the demands of the struggle for existence can assert themselves and reproduce better and more strongly than those who are less well adapted. Darwin himself, however, never led to a targeted selection by z. B. called a "destruction of life unworthy of life". However, his statements were used and misused as a basis for such arguments.

Ernst Haeckel (1834–1919) also applied Darwin's theory to the socio - cultural field and formulated a “unitary theory” of life that he called monism . He was of the opinion that “artificial” breeding could have positive consequences, and referred in this context to the killing of disabled children in ancient Sparta and among the Indians of North America . In his work Die Lebenswunder he explicitly advocated “euthanasia” in the sense of a targeted selection of children.

Haeckel's supporters founded the Monistenbund in 1906 , which campaigned for the legalization of killing on demand. Roland Gerkan published a draft law in 1913 that provided for a “right to euthanasia” if, at the request of the patient, a forensic doctor and two specialists could attest “the predominant probability of a fatal outcome”.

With Alexander Tille (1866–1912) one of the most radical Social Darwinists appeared. In his view, breeding should be limited in the "weak" and "natural" selection restored. He also advocated “social euthanasia” by letting the weak sink to the lowest social level, since the mortality rate is particularly high there. In 1895 he published the study From Darwin to Nietzsche , in which he for the first time represented dualism , the juxtaposition of a "valuable" and a "worthless" life.

For the actions propagated by Tille, Alfred Ploetz coined the term "racial hygiene" from 1895 (synonym for eugenics , a term from Francis Galton - national eugenics 1883). For Ploetz, “racial welfare” in the social Darwinian sense had clear priority over individual welfare.

In 1895 Adolf Jost published his social study The Right to Death . For Jost, the individual claim has to subordinate the interests of society. Utilitarian interests become the absolute standard. Central to Jost's argument is the term value of life .

This value is made up of two factors: the value of life for the person concerned, i.e. the sum of joy and pain that he has to experience, and the sum of the benefit or harm that an individual brings for his fellow man. Seen from the perspective of society, the terminally ill is causing it material damage. Together with the "compassion" that one must have for the sick person, his death must be demanded. This compassion should not only serve to justify the killing on demand, but should also legitimize the killing of the “mentally ill” (without consent).

The term “euthanasia” is also based on compassion in the writer Samuel D. Williams junior, who in 1870 saw it as a medical duty to administer anesthetics such as chloroform to the patient in the event of incurable, painful diseases, if he so wished, in order to give the person concerned a “ quick and painless death ”. Other such demands followed and there were reports of "pity killings" in the media around 1900.

Under the influence of Karl Binding and Alfred Hoche , the discussion about a new definition of "euthanasia" reached its real climax in the 20th century. Your writing The Release of Destruction of Unworthy Life initiated and determined the euthanasia debate during the Weimar Republic and prepared the crimes of the Nazi dictatorship to a decisive extent.

Binding considered legally permitting acts of killing under certain circumstances as "curative interventions" in cases in which the painful cause of death rooted in the disease could be replaced by another painless one.

According to Hoche, there are human lives "which have lost their property of legal interest to such an extent that their continued existence has permanently lost all value for the life bearers as well as for society". The intellectual level and the emotions of these people can be compared with those of animals. A person who is “spiritually dead” is unable to make a subjective claim to life. In this respect, the removal of a spiritually dead person is not to be equated with other killing.

The majority of the German doctors opposed the “destruction of life unworthy of life”.

Change of the term up to the time of National Socialism

In the first third of the 20th century, especially during the National Socialist era , the scope of the term euthanasia was reinterpreted, which today is partly due to the leveling of the difference between “thanatos” and “ker” death (see above) definition and Discussion of euthanasia influenced.

Brockhaus Konversations-Lexikon 1902

Euthanasia (Greek), alleviation of death, the process by which the doctor seeks to make death recognized as inevitable for the dying person as easy and painless as possible, consists mainly of appropriate positioning, keeping away all external disturbances, and relieving pain through anesthetic and narcotic means (See also doctor, vol. 17), care for fresh air and occasional infusion of mild and refreshing drinks. With the sharp hearing which the dying usually have until the last moment, the greatest caution is required with regard to all expressions of the environment. (Quoted from Drechsel 1993, p. 23f)

Meyers Konversations-Lexikon 1926

Euthanasia (Greek, "beautiful death"), usually a beautiful, dignified death; in medicine euthanasia, the relief brought about by the doctor through suitable means in the event of severe dying of the patient who is apparently dying. The euthanasia movement already supported by K. Binding demands impunity for carrying out the E. (Quoted from Drechsel 1993, p. 24)

The Big Brockhaus 1930

Euthanasia (Greek), comfort in death, the feeling of well-being in the dying person, which the doctor, if he has recognized death as inevitable, may be promoted through pain anesthesia and the use of narcotic agents. Deliberate killing with narcotic means to redeem a seriously ill person, even in the case of inevitable death, is punished. (→ Euthanasia.) (Quoted from Drechsel 1993, p. 25)

The big Brockhaus 1930/34

Euthanasia, Greek euthanasia, the abbreviation of life unworthy of life, either in the sense of the abbreviation of torments in the case of an incurable protracted illness, i.e. for the benefit of the sick, or in the sense of killing e.g. B. idiotic children, so in favor of the general public. (Quoted from Drechsel 1993, p. 25)

Euthanasia as a term for National Socialist murders

During the National Socialist era, the end of what was then called a life unworthy of life was openly discussed in legal and medical journals in the interests of National Socialist racial hygiene . Economic reasons were cited as the basic argument for these killings. It should be made clear here that the use of the word "euthanasia" in this context is not euthanasia in the sense of euthanasia desired by the patient in the event of an incurable disease, but a euphemism for the planned and systematic killing, especially of disabled people.

The term “compassion”, which is often used in writings on euthanasia, does not refer to the patients themselves, but only to the relatives or the human race that produces such so-called degenerations.

In this context, the law for the prevention of genetically ill offspring of July 14, 1933, which permitted the forced sterilization of allegedly genetically ill (schizophrenia, manic-depressive illness, Huntington's disease, hereditary blindness and deafness, severe alcoholism), testifies to the consistent implementation of the National Socialist ideology underlying biological thinking. Between 1933 and 1945, around 350,000 to 400,000 people were sterilized. This forced sterilization cost many lives or caused serious, permanent damage to their health.

With the Nuremberg Race Laws (Reich Citizenship Law and Law for the Protection of German Blood and German Honor) of September 16, 1935, Jews were deprived of civil rights and consequently professional bans were issued. They were prohibited from marrying or having sexual intercourse with non-Jews outside of marriage. The Marriage Health Act of October 18, 1935 required certificates of fitness for marriage for spouses and excluded people with certain diseases from marriage in order to prevent so-called racial contamination.

There are indications that Reichsärzteführer Gerhard Wagner discussed concrete euthanasia measures with the head of the Racial Politics Office as early as 1935/36 . However, due to feared domestic and foreign policy difficulties, the implementation of a euthanasia program was hesitated.

Beginning of the murder of children

In all likelihood, the so-called Kind K. case (also known as Kind Knauer ) was the cause of child euthanasia during the Nazi era. The case occurred before the war began, the exact date is not certain. The child's parents had turned to the Führer Chancellery (KdF) with a death request . They justified their concern with the fact that, according to the doctor Catel (Leipzig), their child would never be normal and the life of such beings was worthless.

After the child's identity seemed to have been clarified in scientific research until recently, the case of child K. is again a research problem today (as of November 2007). However, it is still a so-called case of child K. in Leipzig or the surrounding area Initial case to go out before the start of the war. The child's death date marks a crucial turning point in the decision-making process for carrying out the euthanasia program.

Hitler's attending doctor , Brandt , arranged for the child to be murdered by "euthanasia". Hitler then ordered that the same procedure should be followed in comparable cases. This secret Führer decree is the only supposed legal basis on the basis of which euthanasia was practiced in the years 1939–1945. The draft of an euthanasia law initiated by Hitler's personal physician Theo Morell , which was drawn up in the KdF in spring 1940, met with Hitler's rejection. There was therefore at no time a legal basis for the euthanasia practiced under National Socialism. The penal code even forbade active euthanasia.

The concrete implementation of the euthanasia program was prepared in the KdF by Werner Heyde , Philipp Bouhler , Karl Brandt , Leonardo Conti , Herbert Linden and 10–15 other psychiatrists. An advisory commission was set up to organize the killing of mentally ill children. As a camouflage, the commission chose the name Reich Committee for the Scientific Assessment of Hereditary and Constitutional Ailments.

From August 18, 1939, the so-called circular of the Reich Minister of the Interior demanded that children with certain disabilities (idiocy, microencephaly, hydrocephaly, deformity of all kinds, paralysis) be asked to “clarify scientific questions in the field of congenital malformations and mental underdevelopment” to report to the Reich Committee.

Midwives and doctors in maternity homes were particularly required to report. The Reich Committee decided on the further fate of the children by classifying them into three categories:

  1. "No further measures",
  2. “Observation”, that is, admission to a psychiatric sanatorium - reserved for killing and
  3. "Treatment" means immediate killing.

The first specialist department was set up in Brandenburg-Görden for this purpose . In total there were over 30 such departments. Individual murders involving the administration of the Luminal barbiturate took place until 1945.

Killing adults

Adult euthanasia under National Socialism began on September 21, 1939 with a decree covering all psychiatric institutions. At the same time, more than 10,000 mentally ill people were murdered by shooting or gas in the east.

The expansion of the euthanasia center in Berlin and the establishment of further cover organizations (Reichsarbeitsgemeinschaft Heil und Pflegeenstalten, non-profit foundation for institutional care - foundation, non-profit sick transport GmbH - Gekrat ) were further steps in the framework of the program.

In April 1940, the company moved into premises in Berlin, Tiergartenstrasse 4 , which gave Aktion T4 its internal name. As part of this action, it was planned to have the killing of the mentally ill in extermination centers.

The first of these centers was established in Grafeneck near Reutlingen in 1939 . The establishment of further centers took place in 1940 in Brandenburg , in Hartheim and in Sonnenstein . Instead of Grafeneck, the center in Hadamar was opened in January 1941 .

The main criterion for inclusion on the death lists was the inability to work of the mentally ill. From 1940 they were transferred to extermination centers for camouflage purposes via so-called intermediate centers.

Even after the official termination of the euthanasia program, killings continued in Sonnenstein, Bernburg and Hartheim.

Victims of these murders were 4,000–5,000 veterans who were traumatized and mentally ill in the First World War , after a law of July 3, 1934, finally no longer recognized mental suffering as a result of the war effort.

The protest of Evangelical Regional Bishop Theophil Wurm on July 19, 1940, but above all the sermon of the Catholic Bishop of Münster Clemens August Cardinal Graf von Galen on August 3, 1941, the manuscript of which was copied and circulated in large numbers, are considered to be partly responsible viewed for the official termination of action T4 .

On the other hand, some of those responsible for the killing attempted to justify their actions on the basis of statements made by Martin Luther . In 1964 Werner Heyde and Hans Hefelmann referred directly to a speech at the table by Luther during the trial of their involvement in a murder. In 1962 Werner Catel also called for the "extinction" of around 16,000 such disabled people, referring to this speech. Luther saw so-called changeling , mentally handicapped children, as part of the outlook of his time. In his dinner speech in 5207, Luther referred to it as “massa carnis”, a “mass of flesh” which had no soul and which was created by the devil . In the case of a 12-year-old changeling, he advised the Prince of Anhalt to drown him in a river (he wanted to dare the “ homicidium ( Latin for murder)” in his place ), but the princes did not follow his advice.

Role of medicine in euthanasia during the Nazi era

This article or the following section is not adequately provided with supporting documents ( e.g. individual evidence ). Information without sufficient evidence could be removed soon. Please help Wikipedia by researching the information and including good evidence.

The initiative function of newly installed scientific elites played an essential role in the Nazi medical crimes. Those who did not submit to the Nazi ideology had no chance of advancement, critical doctors were discharged early and persecuted.

New Nazi doctors put what they saw as a modern Nazi ideology over the medical oath , which forbids the killing of a patient or the advice to do so. Those who worked in the institutions partially allowed the covert murder of life that was touted as unworthy. Others specifically use the open spaces of action to carry out "social and sanitary" programs to create a "hereditary healthy national body". All of the state hospitals were involved in the systematic murder of the mentally ill, such as the T4 campaign .

Mainly concentration camp doctors were sentenced to death in the Dachau trials and in the Nuremberg doctors trial . Lighter sentences were passed in the Nuremberg legal process .

Most of the more than 20 university institutes for racial hygiene had been founded before the National Socialists came to power. After the end of the Nazi era, the lawyers and doctors involved often continued to work for decades.

Memorial in Berlin, Tiergartenstrasse

Berlin Curves, 1986

The memorial in Berlin , Tiergartenstrasse , consists of two large curved steel plates by Richard Serra . The name Serra originally intended was Berlin Curves . An inscription from the Senate for information in a commemorative plaque is on the path next to it. For the world-famous Serra, it is very typical materials (rusty, approx. 3 cm thick, approx. 2.5 m high steel plates) and shapes (concave rectangles anchored in the floor, parallel aligned, spaces accessible) that can make the viewer think.

Victim

For decades , archivists cited a “ post-mortem protection of privacy” laid down in the Federal Archives Act as the reason for a ban on public naming of victims of Nazi euthanasia : The publication of names and data violates their dignity, which must also be respected after death. In addition, one must protect the interests of relatives. Ehrhard Körting, lawyer and former Berlin Senator for the Interior, assessed differently: The human dignity of the victim “was violated by the murder and not by the publication of the murder. Rather, the human dignity is likely to result in the victim's claim to respect not to remain anonymous and anonymous ”. With this, Körting shared the criticism of many historians , relatives and activists of the anti- psychiatry scene and the disability movement : The constant invisibility of the victims is part of the Nazi logic, according to which disability and psychological impairment should remain a shameful taboo. So indirectly the Nazi stigmatization of these people is continued.

At a conference organized in June 2016 by the responsible state minister for culture, Monika Grütters, with the Berlin foundation “ Topography of Terror ” to end anonymization, it was decided to reinterpret the Federal Archives Act and publish the names of the “euthanasia” victims. Instructions to the archive staff would prepare, in addition, there should an online - database giving the stocks concerned of the Federal Archives, only the publication of medical details are still subject to restrictions.

Current debate

Today's debate is hardly ever referred to as euthanasia. However, the crimes of the Nazi era - especially in Germany - still influence the discussion today. People often advocate active euthanasia because they are very afraid of pain, helplessness and excruciating medical oversupply at the end of their lives. There is a demand for better research into the most effective medical help in the form of good pain therapy and palliative medicine . There are also fears that the legislation on pre-implantation diagnosis (PGD), embryonic stem cell research and abusive active euthanasia will be relaxed . Religious arguments often also play a role here.

Preimplantation Diagnostics

Research on embryos has not been permitted in Germany since the Embryo Protection Act passed by the German Bundestag in 1990 . The fertilized egg cell was established as the beginning of human life worthy of protection. Some are demanding that pre-implantation diagnostics, which has been banned so far, be allowed in Germany. The central question is whether, after artificial insemination, examination of an embryo before it is implanted in a woman's body is legitimate to examine for genetic damage.

Proponents of this procedure call for its use in very limited cases, namely in couples who are likely to suffer from severe hereditary defects. They argue with the objection that PGD cannot be forbidden, since termination of pregnancy is not punishable under these conditions .

Stem cell research

On April 26, 2003, the German Bundestag approved the import of human embryonic stem cells. Stem cells are cells that renew themselves through cell division and can mature into single or multiple cell types (differentiation). They can be particularly suitable for tissue replacement. A distinction is made between pluripotent and totipotent stem cells. Pluripotent stem cells have the ability to develop into cells of different specializations, but not into an individual.

Totipotent (Latin, literally "capable of anything") stem cells are cells that, if the necessary conditions are met, are able to divide and develop into an individual. One differentiates according to their origin

  • embryonic stem cells from embryos created by in-vitro fertilization (IVF),
  • embryonic stem cells generated by nuclear transfer,
  • embryonic germ cells (EG cells) from abortion,
  • neonatal stem cells from umbilical cord blood,
  • adult or somatic stem cells.

With the methods currently used, the extraction of embryonic stem cells results in the destruction of the blastocyst.

Another biomedical but highly controversial technique involves what is known as cloning .

The transfer of a diploid (complete set of chromosomes) cell nucleus into an enucleated, unfertilized egg cell enables asexual reproduction in mammals as well:

  • reproductive cloning: the growing embryo is implanted in the uterus of a surrogate mother and carried to term,
  • therapeutic cloning: embryonic stem cells are removed from the blastocyst after about 4 days in order to develop cells or tissues.

The “Stem Cell Act” stipulates that no human embryos may be killed for research purposes in the future either. The import of stem cells, which must be developed before January 1st, 2002, is permitted if evidence of “high-ranking research goals for the acquisition of scientific knowledge in the context of basic research” is provided.

Other state regulations

This article or the following section is not adequately provided with supporting documents ( e.g. individual evidence ). Information without sufficient evidence could be removed soon. Please help Wikipedia by researching the information and including good evidence.

Belgium

In 2003, after more than two years of public debate, Belgium passed an euthanasia law with the consent of Social Democrats and Liberals. Two doctors must agree to each case. A state commission controls every case.

Netherlands

In the Netherlands, a scientific study found that during the so-called test phase before the statutory regulation of active euthanasia there were 1,000 cases per year in which the person killed had carried out “life-ending acts without an express wish”. After the introduction of the legally regulated active euthanasia, there were still 900 cases that were killed without the protective measures required by the law to be observed.

In September 2004 the Groningen University Clinic “Universitair Medisch Centrum Groningen” formulated the so-called Groninger Protocol . The protocol mentions the guidelines and criteria as a condition under which doctors may practice “termination of the life of newborns” without being able to be prosecuted. The euthanasia of newborns is permitted under the conditions of the Groninger Protocol and is protected by criminal law, so that doctors carrying out the work cannot be prosecuted for the murder of minors (who have not expressly requested euthanasia).

Romania

Until the political turning point and the fall of Ceaușescu in 1989, many unwanted, disabled and chronically ill children and adults in homes like Cighid were systematically neglected in Romania (“euthanasia” due to the circumstances). There has also been "euthanasia" for the elderly in which patients over the age of 65 have been denied medical care.

Switzerland

In Switzerland, indirect active euthanasia, in which means are used to alleviate suffering, the side effects of which can reduce the lifespan, is not regulated by law. The medical profession accepts this form of euthanasia and practices it in exceptional cases. Passive euthanasia, i.e. H. The waiver of the initiation of life-sustaining measures or the termination of these is judged to be permissible by the guidelines of the Swiss Academy of Medical Sciences and is practiced in Switzerland.

Bioethics Convention (Grafeneck Declaration)

Bioethics Convention ( Grafenecker Declaration ) takes the following position on the subject:

“The questions about life and death concern us all. It's about political decisions. The decisions about this should not be left to science alone. A well-founded and conscientious public discussion that leaves nothing unsaid is necessary. Neither intent nor goals, neither hopes nor fears. We need clarification, as this is directed against irrational fears and apocalyptic ideas. We have to agree on which direction we want to give progress. We always have to decide anew which limits we want to cross and which limits we want to accept. "

literature

  • Udo Benzenhöfer : The good death? Euthanasia and euthanasia, past and present. Beck, Munich; 1999, revised 2009 Edition 224 pp. ISBN 978-3-525-30162-3 . Digitized MDZ
  • Klaus-Peter Drechsel: Judged, measured, murdered. Practice of euthanasia until the end of German fascism. DISS, Duisburg 1993, ISBN 3-927388-37-8 .
  • Wolfgang U. Eckart : Euthanasia. In: Werner E. Gerabek , Bernhard D. Haage, Gundolf Keil , Wolfgang Wegner (eds.): Enzyklopädie Medizingeschichte. De Gruyter, Berlin / New York 2005, ISBN 3-11-015714-4 , pp. 382-384.
  • Ludger Fittkau : Autonomy and foreign killing. Euthanasia as a social technology. Mabuse, Frankfurt am Main 2006, ISBN 3-938304-18-9 .
  • Michael Frensch (Ed.): Euthanasia. Are all people persons? Novalis, Schaffhausen 1992, ISBN 3-7214-0640-0 .
  • Andreas Frewer & Clemens Eickhoff (eds.): "Euthanasia" and the current euthanasia debate. The historical background of medical ethics. Campus, Frankfurt am Main 2000, ISBN 3-593-36639-8 .
  • Christian Geyer (Ed.): Biopolitics. The positions. Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 2001, ISBN 3-518-12261-4 .
  • Hans Grewel : License to kill. The price of technological advancement in medicine. Klett-Cotta, Stuttgart 2002, ISBN 3-608-94039-1 .
  • Eberhard Gabriel , Wolfgang Neugebauer (ed.): On the history of NS euthanasia in Vienna. Böhlau, Vienna et al. 1999 ff.
    • Part 1: Nazi euthanasia in Vienna. 1999, ISBN 3-205-98951-1 .
    • Part 2: From Forced Sterilization to Murder. 2002, ISBN 3-205-99325-X .
    • Part 3: Pioneers of Annihilation? Eugenics, racial hygiene and euthanasia in the Austrian discussion before 1938. 2005, ISBN 3-205-77122-2 .
  • Rainer Hegselmann, Reinhard Merkel (ed.): On the debate on euthanasia. Contributions and opinions. 2nd Edition. Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1992, ISBN 3-518-28543-2 .
  • Hubert Heilemann: Violence against the mentally ill. Yesterday - today - and tomorrow? In memory of the victims of National Socialism among the mentally ill and mentally handicapped (= series of publications of the Federal Conference of Psychiatric Hospitals , Volume 5). Roderer Verlag, Regensburg 2001, ISBN 978-3-89783-219-0 .
  • Franz-Josef Hücker: Relocated to an unknown location. Euthanasia crimes under the swastika. In: Nassauische Annalen 127, 2016, pp. 259–276.
  • Jay Joseph: The 1942 'Euthanasia' Debate in the American Journal of Psychiatry. In: History of Psychiatry. 16/2, 2005, pp. 171-179, doi : 10.1177 / 0957154X05047004 .
  • Ernst Klee : "Euthanasia" in the Nazi state. The "destruction of life unworthy of life". Fischer, Frankfurt am Main 1983, ISBN 3-10-039303-1 .
  • Ernst Klee (Ed.): Documents on "Euthanasia". Fischer Taschenbuch 4327, Frankfurt am Main 1985, ISBN 3-596-24327-0 .
  • Christian Merkel: "Death to idiots." Eugenics and euthanasia in the legal reception of the German Empire during the Hitler era. Logos, Berlin 2007, ISBN 3-8325-1284-5 .
  • Ronald Preston: Euthanasia. In: Theologische Realenzyklopädie 10, 1982, pp. 551-557.
  • Helene Schadel: ΦΑΝΑΤΟΣ. Studies on the concept of death in ancient philosophy and medicine. (Medical dissertation, Würzburg 1974) Horst Wellm Verlag, Pattensen 1975 (= Würzburg medical-historical research, 2), 153 pages.
  • Michael Schwartz : "Euthanasia" debates in Germany (1895-1945) , In: Vierteljahrshefte für Zeitgeschichte , 46 (4), 1998, pp. 617-665.
  • Michael Stolberg : The History of Palliative Medicine. Medical care for the dying from 1500 until today. Mabuse, Frankfurt am Main 2011, ISBN 978-3-940529-79-4 , pp. 9, 16 f., 43-49 and 253 f.

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ The word is a hapax legomenon in classical Greek , but was used as a foreign word in Latin (also written with Greek letters).
  2. ↑ Helene Schadel: ΘΑΝΑΤΟΣ. Studies on the concept of death in ancient philosophy and medicine. Horst Wellm Verlag, Pattensen 1975, p. 22 f.
  3. ↑ According to Drechsel 1993, p. 20
  4. ^ Suetonius, Augustus 99
  5. ↑ Plato, Politeia 407 d: Asklepios did not treat the terminally ill, "in order to enable them (not) to have a long and bad life and, as can be assumed, to produce more of the same offspring."
  6. ↑ Bergdolt, K. (2004), The Conscience of Medicine. Medical Morals from Ancient Times to Today . Verlag CH Beck, Munich, p. 41
  7. ↑ Michael Stolberg: The history of palliative medicine. Medical care for the dying from 1500 until today. 2011, pp. 9, 16 f. and 46-48.
  8. ^ Markwart Michler :  Marx, Karl, Mediziner. In: New German Biography (NDB). Volume 16, Duncker & Humblot, Berlin 1990, ISBN 3-428-00197-4 , p. 327 f. ( Digitized version ).
  9. ^ Helge Dvorak: Biographical Lexicon of the German Burschenschaft. Volume I: Politicians. Sub-Volume 4: M-Q. Winter, Heidelberg 2000, ISBN 3-8253-1118-X , pp. 40-41.
  10. ↑ Christoph Hoffmann: The content of the term "euthanasia" in the 19th century and its change in the period up to 1920. Berlin 1969.
  11. ↑ Michael Stolberg (2011), pp. 127–129.
  12. ^ Roland Gerkan: Euthanasia. In: The monistic century. Volume 2, 1913, pp. 169-174.
  13. ↑ Michael Stolberg (2011), p. 161 f. (quoted).
  14. ^ Samuel D. Williams: Euthanasia. In: Essays by members of the Birmingham Speculative Club. 1870, pp. 210-237.
  15. ↑ Michael Stolberg (2011), pp. 159-161.
  16. ^ Luther Society (ed.): Luther . Journal of the Luther Society, 35th year 1964, vol. 1, p. 81.
  17. ^ A b Martin Honecker: Outline of social ethics . Walter de Gruyter, 1995, p. 125
  18. ↑ a b aktion-mensch.de , Rebecca Maskos: Anonymous "euthanasia" victims (December 18, 2016)
  19. ↑ http://www.aktion-leben.de/bioethik
  20. ^ Press release of the FDJP, July 5, 2000

See also