The term "euthanasia" refers to medical procedures involving the direct administration of a lethal drug to a patient who requests it and meets specific legal and medical criteria. The legal and ethical debate surrounding euthanasia and assisted suicide remains a highly controversial issue across Europe, with significant variations in national legislation. This study provides a comparative analysis of the Italian legal framework on euthanasia and assisted suicide in relation to European regulations. Italy maintains one of the most restrictive legal stances, categorizing euthanasia as voluntary homicide (Article 579 of the Penal Code) and assisted suicide as a criminal offense (Article 580). The Italian referendum "Free Until the End" sought to legalize euthanasia through the partial repeal of Article 579 of the Penal Code. Despite constitutional rulings (Nos. 242/2019 and 135/2024) that in-troduced limited exceptions for assisted suicide under strict conditions, legislative progress has been minimal. In contrast, several European countries - including the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Spain, and Portugal - have enacted comprehensive laws regulating euthana-sia and/or assisted suicide. Other nations, such as Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, have legalized assisted suicide while maintaining restrictions on active euthanasia. Recent developments in France and the United Kingdom signal an evolving legal landscape, while nations like Hungary and Norway uphold prohibitive stances. The article critically examines the ethical and medico-legal implications of these disparities, emphasizing the role of palliative care and the physician's duty within end-of-life decision-making. It highlights the need for a more structured regulatory approach in Italy that balances the right to life with the principle of individual self-determination. The findings suggest that while legal frameworks across Europe continue to evolve, Italy must reconsider its rigid legal position to address the complex realities of end-of-life care, ensuring both the protection of life and respect for personal autonomy.
Marrone et al. (Thu,) studied this question.