Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41311310›Full record

ArticleBioethics2026

Critical Medical Ethics as an Approach to the Debate About Assisted Suicide by the Example of Germany.

Meike Gerber

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioethics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Meike GerberInstitute for the History of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany.ORCID 0009-0007-6620-3782

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent literature has seen a growing endorsement of the so-called autonomy-only approach to assisted dying, which rejects suffering as a necessary criterion for access. Proponents argue that this model is most suitable to safeguard individuals against value-based judgments of healthcare professionals about whether their lives are still worth living when it comes to decisions on assisted dying. In this paper, I challenge the assumption that the autonomy-only approach successfully avoids the shortcomings of a joint view at assisted dying that also relies on beneficence-based criteria. Based on the example of Germany, a country that follows the autonomy-only approach towards assisted suicide, I contend that, despite its emphasis on personal freedom, this approach may in practice not truly serve the ideal of autonomy as it claims. Referring to critical medical ethics, I argue that Critical Theory offers the epistemic tools needed to identify underlying social contradictions and to evaluate the concept of autonomy in relation to its real-world application. Drawing on the work of Herbert Marcuse, I highlight the importance of considering how individual needs are shaped and mediated by social conditions in ethical deliberations on assisted dying. I conclude that ethical considerations have to avoid both submitting to short-sighted conceptions of autonomy and taking a paternalistic stance that dismisses individual pledges for assisted suicide if they disagree with supposedly objective reasons.

Indexed as

Ethics, MedicalPersonal AutonomySuicide, AssistedBeneficenceDecision MakingGermanyHumansassisted suicideautonomycritical theoryeuthanasiaprinciplism

Identifiers

PMID41311310
PMCPMC12918501

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.