Page 64 - IJSA, Vol. 7, No 1, 2024

International Journal of Science Annals, Vol. 7, No. 1, 2024
рrint ISSN: 2617-2682; online ISSN: 2707-3637; DOI:10.26697/ijsa

being followed by a psychiatrist, that her depressive with dignity. The son did not reply to her letter, while the
disorder had started very early (at the age of 19 years) daughter replied: although very saddened by the decision,
and that the many pharmacological approaches had never she respected her mother’s will.
resulted in full recovery, even if there was a break in 2006 On February 7, 2012, Prof. W. D. contacted another
when the woman, after the suicide of her husband, had psychiatrist, Dr. B., who stated that the woman’s health
embarked on a new relationship, then abruptly problem was chronic and no longer treatable on a
interrupted. therapeutic level. The same Dr. B., on the following 10
For the last two years, Mrs. Godelieva de Troyer had February, sent a letter to Dr. T. informing her that he had
decided to sever ties with her children and her previously met the woman (in 1996) due to a very serious
grandchildren, for reasons that were not explored at the psychopathology probably related to a childhood
time by Prof. W. D. This physician came anyway to the traumatic experience, highlighting that the prognosis was
conclusion that the woman was suffering from a serious extremely uncertain and obscure.
personality disorder, associated with a chronic mood On February 14, the patient formalized her euthanasia
disorder, and that she no longer believed in her functional request in writing, indicating in Prof. W. D. her attending
recovery and in the success of any pharmacological physician. On the same day, Dr. T. signed a report
option. He therefore agreed to become her attending acknowledging that the patient had consulted her several
physician in the path aimed at euthanasia, instructing her times to inform her of her decision to die in order to put
to consult a second psychiatrist (Dr. V.), as required by an end to her unbearable and hopeless suffering. In that
Belgian law. report, the woman was described as lucid and reasonable
The meeting between the woman and Dr. V. took place even after she had been provided with information on
on 17 December 2011: on that occasion, the specialist possible therapeutic options, and then concluded that the
confirmed the chronic depressive picture from which the conditions established by the Belgian law permitted to
patient was suffering, albeit with “ups and downs”, help her die. The same conclusion was reached on the
concluding that the request for euthanasia was premature, following February 17 by Dr. V. D., who confirmed the
suggesting that she go to another psychiatrist to reset the serious social isolation of the woman and her refusal to
drug treatment plan. undergo any further drug therapy.
On December 23, 2011, Prof. W. D. met again the On February 27, 2012, the patient signed a handwritten
woman who expressed her deep concern of being declaration acknowledging her intention to donate her
abandoned and seeing not accepted her request to die body to science; two days later, on February 29, 2012,
with euthanasia while admitting that she was ready to see she made a donation of 2,500 euros to Leif (Levenseinde
another psychiatrist (Dr. V. D.), as requested by Dr. V. Informathieforum), a non-profit association led by
On that occasion, Mrs. de Troyer spoke about the reasons Prof. W. D., which also had among its members Drs. T.
that had motivated her to break off relations with her two and V. D.
children, in particular with her eldest son, described by On 8 and 12 March 2012, Prof. W. D spoke again with
the woman as a person she was afraid of due to his the woman concluding that there were no more prospects
aggressiveness. In a subsequent meeting, which took for continuing her life.
place on January 12, 2012, Mrs. Godelieva de Troyer told On March 20, 2012, Mrs. de Troyer met P. D., a person
Prof. W. D. she was feeling deeply exhausted, she trusted, confiding to her that she intended to write a
confirming her decision not to see her children anymore, farewell letter to her children.
specifying that she had yet to be visited by Dr. V .D. On April 13, 2012, Prof. W. D. and P. D. met again
because not reachable. Prof. W. D. thus advised her to Mrs. Godelieva de Troyer who accepted the idea of
consult another psychiatrist, Dr. T. writing a letter addressed to her children with the
The meeting with the latter took place on January 17, assistance of P. D. At the end of the conversation,
2012, and during the meeting the woman specified that Prof. W. D. came to the conclusion that the only
her daughter, with whom all contact had been interrupted reasonable option was euthanasia and set the date for
for two years, knew of her request to die by euthanasia April 19, 2012.
specifying that she no longer had anyone in her life, that On April 10, 2022, two telephone consultations took
she was alone, that she felt incurably ill, that she no place between the woman and the same Prof. W. D. who
longer had the stamina to do anything and that she wanted reassured her regarding her will: the euthanasia act was
to die as soon as possible. Although she was never practiced on the following April 19 by the same
hospitalized in a psychiatric environment (this Prof. W. D. in the UZ Brussels University Hospital, in
opportunity was never raised by any doctor), Mrs. de the presence of Mr. Samuel Vinck (an attorney) and some
Troyer added that she had no faith in psychiatric science. friends of the woman.
On 20 January 2012, there was a new consultation with Information of her death was given to her children on the
Prof. W. D., who agreed to accompany her personally to following 20 April, before the opinion expressed by the
Dr. V. D. This psychiatrist suggested her to inform the federal control commission provided for by Belgian law,
children of her decision to die, so that they could co-chaired by the same Prof. W. D., who ascertained the
accompany her and be present during the euthanasia regularity of the euthanasia procedure and the observance
procedure. Thus, on 31 January 2012, the woman sent an of all the criteria established by Belgian law verified by
email to her two children to inform them of her decision, “deux médecins indépendants, qui confirmaient la
the endless severity of her suffering and her desire to die capacité de la patiente, l’incurabilité de sa pathologie et

62