Euthanasia Case Studies: Countries, Courts and Real Stories

On New Year's Day 2014, Brittany Maynard learned she had brain cancer. She was 29. She had been married to Dan Diaz for just over a year. In April, doctors told her the tumour had come back in a more aggressive form. They gave her about six months to live (Compassion & Choices).

Maynard lived in California, which had no assisted dying law at the time. So she and her family moved to Oregon. Oregon's Death with Dignity Act lets a dying adult ask a doctor for a prescription they can choose to take themselves. In October 2014 she explained her decision in an essay for CNN. "I do not want to die. But I am dying," she wrote. She also wrote that she would not tell anyone else to make the same choice. Then she asked a question that millions of readers shared:

"Who has the right to tell me that I don't deserve this choice?" — Brittany Maynard, CNN, October 2014

She died in November 2014. Less than a year later, on 5 October 2015, California signed its End of Life Option Act into law (Wikipedia summary). Dan Diaz kept campaigning, state by state.

One story can move millions of people. But one story is not the whole picture. Think of a single case as a torch in a dark room. It lights one corner very clearly. Official data is like the ceiling light. You see the whole room, but with less detail. This page uses both.

You will find three kinds of evidence here, with a label on each:

• Strong: large official datasets or repeated studies over many years.
• Mixed: good data, but experts disagree about what it means.
• Early: new laws or few years of data.

A quick note on words. Euthanasia means a doctor or nurse gives the medicine. Assisted suicide (often called assisted dying) means the person takes it themselves. Canada's MAID (medical assistance in dying) covers both. This page does not describe how either is done.

The Netherlands has the longest record of legal, regulated euthanasia. Its 2002 law turned into statute a practice that Dutch courts had tolerated, under conditions, since the 1970s and 1980s.

The rules. A doctor must be satisfied that the request is voluntary and well considered. The suffering must be unbearable, with no prospect of improvement. There must be no reasonable alternative. A second, independent doctor must see the patient. After the death, the doctor reports the case to one of five Regional Euthanasia Review Committees (called RTE). The committees check every case.

The numbers (strong evidence). Reports grew from about 1,800 in 2003 to 9,958 in 2024. In 2025, the committees received 10,341 reports. That was 6.0% of all Dutch deaths, up from 5.8% (RTE 2025 figures).

The 2025 breakdown shows who these patients were:

Most patients were aged 60 to 90. About 98% of cases were euthanasia. Only 175 were assisted suicide. The committees found that doctors failed the due-care rules in 7 cases out of 10,341.

What the research found. Dutch researchers have surveyed doctors about a sample of deaths every five years since 1990. A 2012 Lancet study found that in 2010, 77% of euthanasia and assisted suicide cases were reported to a committee. So about one in four was not. The same study found that ending life without an explicit request fell from 0.8% of deaths in 1990 to 0.2% in 2010. The authors concluded that the law made practice "relatively transparent." Critics answer that a system based on self-reporting cannot fully check what is not reported. Both points are true.

The dementia case. In 2016, a geriatrician ended the life of a 74-year-old woman with severe Alzheimer's disease. Years earlier, the woman had written an advance directive asking for euthanasia. But by 2016 she could no longer confirm her wish. The doctor, Marinou Arends, became the first doctor prosecuted under the 2002 law. A court acquitted her in 2019. On 21 April 2020, the Dutch Supreme Court upheld this. It said a doctor may follow a written directive when the patient can no longer express a will, if every due-care rule is met (Hastings Center Report, 2022). Such cases remain rare. In 2025 the committees reviewed 11 cases involving patients who could not decide for themselves.

Children. Since 1 February 2024, Dutch rules have covered children aged 1 to 12 who are terminally ill and suffer unbearably, when there is no reasonable alternative, including palliative care. The government had expected 5 to 10 cases a year. None was reported in 2024. In September 2026, a review committee published the first case. The child was almost two years old, born very early, with severe brain damage and epilepsy. Dutch law calls this "termination of life", not euthanasia, because a young child cannot make a request. The first independent doctors said the child was not yet suffering unbearably and that a new medicine should be tried. It was tried, and it failed. A later independent doctor reached a different view. The committee found the doctor acted with due care, and prosecutors brought no charges (IBTimes UK). Supporters see careful checks working. Critics see doctors disagreeing over a child who could never speak for themselves.

Psychiatric cases (mixed evidence). A 2016 JAMA Psychiatry study by Scott Kim and colleagues read 66 Dutch psychiatric case reports from 2011 to 2014. 70% of patients were women. Most were described as socially isolated or lonely. Consulting doctors disagreed in 24% of cases. In 11%, there was no independent psychiatrist. The authors found that review committees "generally defer" to the treating doctor. Psychiatric cases fell to 174 in 2025, from 219 in 2024. 19 of them involved people under 30.

If you live with depression or another mental illness and these facts feel close to home, please know that treatment and support help many people, even after years of struggle. The support box at the top of this page lists people you can talk to today.

Belgium passed its law in 2002, a few months after the Netherlands. It requires constant and unbearable physical or mental suffering from a serious and incurable condition. Unlike the Dutch law, it names mental suffering directly.

Children. In 2014, Belgium became the first country to remove any age limit for euthanasia. A child must be terminally ill, have physical suffering only, understand the request, and have parental consent and a psychological assessment. Use has been very rare: seven cases since 2014, one of them in 2025.

The numbers (strong evidence). The Federal Commission for the Control and Evaluation of Euthanasia received 4,486 reports in 2025. That was 12.4% more than in 2024 and 4.0% of all deaths, up from 3.6% (2025 figures).

• Cancer: 49.9%
• Several conditions together: 29.6%
• Neurological disease: 8.2%
• Cognitive disorders such as dementia: 1.7%
• Psychiatric conditions: 1.6%
• Patients aged over 70: 73.7%
• Death not expected in the short term: 24.9% (1,117 people)

About 75% of reports were filed in Dutch and 25% in French. This suggests euthanasia is much more common in Dutch-speaking Flanders than in French-speaking Wallonia. The commission sent no case to prosecutors in 2025.

The Tine Nys trial. Tine Nys was 38 when she received euthanasia in 2010 for psychiatric suffering. Her family later accused three doctors of breaking the law. In January 2020, a jury in Ghent acquitted all three (VRT News). It was the first criminal trial under the Belgian law.

Mortier v Belgium. Tom Mortier's mother had lived with chronic depression for about 40 years. She received euthanasia in 2012. Her son was told only afterwards. He took Belgium to the European Court of Human Rights. In October 2022, the court ruled (ECHR legal summary):

• The law itself can protect the right to life (5 votes to 2).
• The doctors followed the law before the death (5 votes to 2).
• But Belgium violated the right to life in its review afterwards (unanimous). The doctor who carried out the euthanasia sat on the review board and could vote on whether his own act was legal. That meant the review was not independent. The criminal investigation also took too long.
• There was no violation of the son's right to family life (6 votes to 1).

The lesson. Belgium shows that who checks the doctors matters as much as the rules. Supporters see a careful system used mostly by older people with cancer. Critics see wide criteria and weak independent review. Both cite the same court ruling.

Oregon voters passed the Death with Dignity Act in 1994. Legal challenges delayed it until 1997. It allows assisted suicide only, not euthanasia: the patient must take the medicine themselves. The patient must be 18 or older, able to make health decisions, and expected to die within six months. Two doctors must agree. Oregon dropped its residency rule in 2023.

The Oregon Health Authority publishes a report every year. Its 2025 Data Summary is one of the most detailed datasets in the world (strong evidence).

The numbers.

• 637 people received prescriptions in 2025 (609 in 2024).
• 400 people died using the law in 2025 (421 in 2024). That was about 1.0% of deaths in Oregon.
• Since 1997, 5,520 people have received prescriptions and 3,691 (67%) used them.
• Of the 637 people who got a prescription in 2025, 100 (16%) did not use it and died of other causes. For 179 more, the outcome was not yet known.
• Of those who died using the law in 2025, 24 (6%) had lived more than six months after getting the prescription. Doctors' estimates of time left are not exact.
• 37 prescription holders (6%) lived outside Oregon.

Brittany Maynard called her prescription "a safety net." She wrote that having it gave her "a sense of peace." For some patients, the point is to know the option exists. Since 1997, about one in three people who received a prescription did not use it.

Who used it. In 2025, the median age was 76, and 88% were 65 or older. 94% were white. Half had a bachelor's degree or higher. Cancer was the main illness (61%), then neurological disease (14%) and heart disease (11%). 92% were enrolled in hospice care. Excluding unknown cases, all had health insurance.

Why they asked. Doctors record each patient's end-of-life concerns. More than one can apply.

So the main drivers are control and quality of life, not pain alone. Supporters say this shows people choosing on their own terms. Critics point to "burden" (40%) as a sign of social pressure.

A point of debate (mixed evidence). In 2025, only 2 patients (0.5%) were referred for a psychological or psychiatric check. Critics say depression can be missed. Supporters say doctors refer only when they have a concern, as the law requires. The Oregon Health Authority made no referrals to the medical board for breaking reporting rules in 2025.

The court case. In 2001 the US Attorney General tried to stop Oregon doctors from using controlled drugs under the Act. In Gonzales v. Oregon (17 January 2006), the US Supreme Court ruled 6 to 3 that federal drug law did not give him that power (Cornell LII). Oregon's model has since been copied widely. When Illinois's law took effect in September 2026, it became the 14th US jurisdiction to put such a law into practice (Death with Dignity).

The court case. On 6 February 2015, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled unanimously in Carter v Canada. The plaintiffs included Gloria Taylor, who had ALS, and the family of Kay Carter. The court struck down the ban for a competent adult who "clearly consents" and has a "grievous and irremediable medical condition" causing suffering that is intolerable to them (case summary).

The laws. Parliament's 2016 law required that natural death be "reasonably foreseeable." After a Quebec court struck down that limit in 2019, Parliament passed Bill C-7 in 2021. It created two tracks:

• Track 1: natural death is reasonably foreseeable. There is no fixed waiting period.
• Track 2: natural death is not reasonably foreseeable. The assessment takes at least 90 days, and one assessor must have expertise in the person's condition.

The numbers (strong evidence). Health Canada's sixth annual report gives these figures for 2024:

• 16,499 MAID deaths, or 5.1% of all deaths in Canada. That is about 1 in 20.
• Growth slowed to 6.9%, down from 36.8% between 2019 and 2020.
• 76,475 MAID deaths in total since 2016.
• Track 1: 15,767 people (95.6%). Track 2: 732 people (4.4%).
• Median age: 77.9. Cancer was the most common condition in Track 1 (63.6%).
• 74.1% had received palliative care.
• 1,327 requests were found ineligible, and 692 people withdrew.

Why people asked. Nearly everyone (95% to 98%) reported losing the ability to do meaningful activities. One number stands out. Isolation or loneliness was reported by 21.9% in Track 1 but 44.7% in Track 2. That gap is at the centre of the Canadian debate.

What the coroner found (mixed evidence). Ontario's Chief Coroner runs a committee that reviews MAID deaths. Its 2024 report on Track 2 studied 116 Track 2 deaths in 2023, out of 4,644 MAID deaths in Ontario. 61% were women.

One case was "Ms. B," a woman in her 50s with multiple chemical sensitivity, a condition in which everyday chemicals make a person ill. For years she could not find housing she could live in, and she became very isolated. The committee could not agree whether she was eligible. Many members would not have found her eligible. Some thought mental health problems lay underneath. Others pointed to an unmet need for housing. Other members thought her condition would have caused suffering even in better housing. Almost all agreed on one thing: social needs such as housing should be tackled first, and urgent social services should come before MAID.

The report also looked at where people lived. In the poorest fifth of neighbourhoods, people made up 28.4% of Track 2 deaths, compared with 21.5% of Track 1. In the fifth with the least stable housing, the figures were 48.3% and 34.3%. Psychiatrist Sonu Gaind, a critic of expansion, argues this shows social suffering pushing people towards MAID (The Conversation). Some researchers reply that people in poorer areas die sooner from all causes. They say Track 2 should be compared with those death rates, not with the whole population. The report itself warns that these are area-based estimates, not facts about each person.

A disabled man's warning. Roger Foley was born with spinocerebellar ataxia, a disease that slowly takes away movement. In 2018 he released recordings of hospital staff raising assisted death with him. On 10 November 2020, he told Parliament's justice committee that he had been asking for "assistance to live" and for home care he could direct himself. "My life has been devalued," he said (testimony). In January 2021, while Parliament debated Bill C-7, three UN human rights experts issued a warning. Laws that offer assisted death to people who are not dying, they said, tend to rest on "ableist" assumptions about the quality and worth of a disabled person's life. Their statement did not name Canada (Globe and Mail).

Mental illness alone. C-7 excluded people whose only condition is a mental illness. The exclusion was set to end in 2023, then delayed to 2024, then to March 2027. On 7 October 2026, Justice Minister Sean Fraser said a new bill this fall will keep the exclusion with no end date. He pointed to weak access to mental health care in some communities and to a lack of agreement on when a mental illness is truly incurable. The bill will also allow advance requests by people diagnosed with an illness that will later take away their capacity to decide (CP24). The disability group Inclusion Canada welcomed the exclusion but opposed advance requests. "Consent at the time is the most basic protection a person has," its chief executive said. Dying With Dignity Canada called the exclusion a breach of Charter rights.

Indigenous perspectives. Some Indigenous leaders worry that MAID is offered to people who lack good health care, housing and social services. Others stress the right of Indigenous people to make their own end-of-life decisions.

Switzerland does not have a special assisted dying law. Instead, Article 115 of its Criminal Code punishes anyone who assists a suicide "for selfish motives" (English text). This rule dates from the 1937 code. Assisting for unselfish reasons is not a crime. Euthanasia, where someone else gives the medicine, is still illegal.

Because of this, non-profit groups rather than hospitals arrange most assisted deaths. The best known are Exit, founded in 1982, and Dignitas, founded in 1998. The person must take the medicine themselves. Police investigate every assisted death as a non-natural death (overview).

The numbers (strong evidence). The Swiss Federal Statistical Office recorded 1,729 assisted suicides among residents in 2023: 693 men and 1,036 women. Their average ages were 78 and 80. This was up from 2022 (FSO). Exit, the largest group, reports its own figures each year. It says 1,421 people in German- and Italian-speaking Switzerland had an assisted suicide through Exit in 2025, up from 1,235 in 2024. Their average age was 80. These are the group's own numbers, not official statistics (Swissinfo).

The debate. Supporters say the Swiss model shows that assisted dying can work outside the normal medical system. Critics say there is no national body that reviews each case before it happens. They also object that people from other countries can use the Swiss groups. Swiss medical guidelines were tightened in 2022. In 2011, voters in Zurich rejected proposals to ban assisted suicide or limit it to residents.

Courts have shaped this issue as much as parliaments. Here are the landmark rulings in order. For the full story behind each one, see our guide to 19 famous euthanasia cases.

A pattern. In Canada, Colombia and Germany, top courts moved first and forced lawmakers to act. In the United States and the United Kingdom, courts refused to create a right and left it to voters and Parliament.

Letting die versus killing. The early US cases, such as Nancy Cruzan's fight over her feeding tube, were about refusing treatment. Almost every country allows this. In a famous 1975 essay, philosopher James Rachels argued that there is no real moral difference between letting a patient die and ending their life (NEJM 1975). Many ethicists and religious thinkers disagree. They say intention matters. A doctor who stops a burdensome treatment accepts death. A doctor who performs euthanasia intends it. You can read more in our ethics section.

Laws often change after one person's story reaches the public. Here are some of the best known. Each person or family chose to tell their story in public. We tell each story in more depth, with both sides, in famous euthanasia cases.

Ramón Sampedro (Spain). A diving accident left Sampedro paralysed from the neck down for nearly 30 years. He fought in the courts for the right to help in dying, and lost. He died in 1998. The film The Sea Inside (2004) told his story to the world. Spain legalised euthanasia in 2021. The law came into force on 25 June 2021 (BOE).

Diane Pretty (UK). Pretty had motor neurone disease and could not move. She asked the courts to promise that her husband Brian would not be prosecuted if he helped her die. The House of Lords refused, and so did the European Court of Human Rights in April 2002.

Tony Nicklinson (UK). A stroke in 2005 left Nicklinson with locked-in syndrome. He could move only his head and eyes. He called his life "a living nightmare." He lost in the High Court in August 2012 and died later that month (BBC News). His wife Jane carried the case to the Supreme Court. In 2014 it ruled against the family (BBC News). But two of the nine judges, Lady Hale and Lord Kerr, would have declared the ban incompatible with human rights.

Terri Schiavo (USA). Schiavo spent years in a persistent vegetative state. Her husband wanted her feeding tube removed. Her parents fought this. The case reached Congress and the President before treatment ended in 2005. It pushed many families to talk about advance directives, written instructions about the care a person would want.

Vincent Lambert (France). A road accident in 2008 left Lambert, a nurse, with severe brain damage. His wife and his parents disagreed about stopping his artificial feeding. They fought for years in French and European courts. Treatment was stopped in 2019. The case shaped France's long debate, which ended with its 2026 law.

David Goodall (Australia). At 104, the scientist said his quality of life had become too poor. Australian law did not cover him, because he was not terminally ill. In 2018 he went to Switzerland for an assisted death and spoke openly to the press beforehand.

Martha Sepúlveda (Colombia). In 2021, Sepúlveda, 51, had ALS but was not close to death. She was approved for euthanasia under the new C-233/21 ruling and spoke calmly about it on television. Shortly before the date, a clinic committee cancelled, saying her health had improved (Washington Post). Later that month, a judge ruled in her favour (France 24). Her case made Colombia ask what the court's new words really meant in practice.

Brittany Maynard (USA) and Roger Foley (Canada) told opposite stories. Maynard asked for the right to choose. Foley asked for the support to keep living. Both stories are true. A good law has to answer both.

Rule-breaking is rare in official reports (strong evidence). In 2025, Dutch committees found 7 breaches in 10,341 cases. Belgium sent no case to prosecutors. Oregon made no referrals to the medical board.

But official reports have limits (mixed evidence). Here is what critics and courts have found:

1. Not every case is reported. In 2010, about 23% of Dutch cases went unreported (Lancet 2012).
2. Reviewers may not be independent. The European Court found this in Mortier v Belgium.
3. Reviewers may defer to doctors. Kim and colleagues found this in Dutch psychiatric cases.
4. Social suffering is hard to separate from medical suffering. Ontario's coroner committee could not agree on cases driven by poverty, housing or loneliness.
5. Criteria widen over time. Dutch and Belgian practice grew from mainly terminal cancer to dementia, psychiatric illness and children. Canada moved from "reasonably foreseeable" death to Track 2 in five years.

Disability rights groups make a deeper point. Not Dead Yet, a US group founded in 1996, argues that assisted suicide rests on a harmful idea: that it is better to be dead than disabled (Not Dead Yet). Supporters reply that most users are older people with cancer, not disabled people seeking support.

Review bodies also change their own rules. In 2025, the Dutch committees noticed that talks between patients and independent doctors often took place with a family member in the room. They reminded doctors that this conversation should happen one to one, so the patient can speak freely (RTE 2025). In one case, the doctor who carried out the euthanasia sat in on that talk, and the committee ruled that the due-care rules were not met.

Who uses assisted dying (strong evidence). In 2016, Ezekiel Emanuel and colleagues reviewed data from the US, Canada and Europe in JAMA. They found:

• Euthanasia or assisted suicide made up 0.3% to 4.6% of deaths where legal. (Today the range reaches about 6% in the Netherlands.)
• More than 70% of cases involved cancer.
• Typical patients were older, white and well educated.
• Pain was mostly not the main reason.
• No jurisdiction showed vulnerable patients receiving it at higher rates than the general population.

Vulnerable groups (mixed evidence). A 2007 study by Margaret Battin and colleagues checked ten groups in Oregon and the Netherlands. These included older people, women, the poor, disabled people and people with psychiatric illness. None was at higher risk, except people with AIDS. Users tended to have more social and economic advantages, not fewer. The limit: these are group averages, mostly from before 2006. Newer Canadian data on Track 2 and loneliness raise questions that the older studies did not address.

Does palliative care change the picture? Several landmark studies show how much good end-of-life care matters:

• SUPPORT (JAMA 1995). This study followed 9,105 seriously ill hospital patients in the US. For half of conscious patients who died in hospital, families reported moderate to severe pain at least half the time. A program to improve doctor-patient communication did not help (PubMed). Strong evidence that care often failed dying people.
• Temel et al. (NEJM 2010). 151 patients with advanced lung cancer were randomly given early palliative care or standard care. The palliative group had better quality of life and fewer depressive symptoms (16% vs 38%). They also lived longer: 11.6 months versus 8.9 months (PubMed). Strong evidence for early palliative care in this group, though from a single centre.
• Chochinov et al. (Lancet Oncology 2011). Dignity therapy helps dying patients record what matters most to them. In a trial of 441 patients, it did not reduce distress on the main measures. But patients said it improved their sense of dignity and helped their families (PubMed). Mixed evidence.

In practice, palliative care and assisted dying often sit side by side. In Oregon, 92% of users were in hospice. In Canada, 74% had palliative care. So good care does not remove every request. But poor care can create requests that better care might prevent. Read more in our palliative care section.

The map is changing fast. These are the main changes, checked as of October 2026. Early evidence applies to all of them, because none has years of data yet.

• France. Parliament adopted the law on 15 July 2026 by 291 votes to 241 (Santé.fr). The Constitutional Council approved it on 14 August 2026, with three reservations (decision 2026-910 DC). One protects pharmacists' freedom of conscience. Another lets some private health and care facilities refuse to host the procedure, if other places can meet local needs. It became Law 2026-794 of 18 August 2026 (analysis). It covers adults who are French or stably resident, with a serious, incurable, life-threatening illness in an advanced or terminal stage. Psychological suffering alone does not qualify, and a request cannot be made in advance. As a rule, the person takes the medicine themselves; a doctor or nurse may help only if they physically cannot. Implementing decrees are still needed before anyone can use it.
• Uruguay. Parliament passed Law 20.431 in late October 2025. It came into force in April 2026, when the government published its rules (Presidency of Uruguay). It is the first euthanasia law passed by a parliament in Latin America. Colombia's right came from its courts instead. It requires several doctors' reviews and a confirmation before two witnesses (La Nación).
• Jersey. This self-governing island became the first part of the British Isles to legalise assisted dying. The States Assembly voted 32 to 16 in February 2026. The law received Royal Assent on 9 July 2026. The service is expected in late 2027. It covers people with six months or less to live, or 12 months for neurodegenerative diseases (Humanists UK).
• New York. Governor Kathy Hochul signed the Medical Aid in Dying Act on 6 February 2026. It took effect on 5 August 2026 (Death with Dignity).
• Illinois. Governor JB Pritzker signed "Deb's Law" on 12 December 2025. It took effect on 12 September 2026. Court orders protect some religious providers who object, but do not block the law statewide (Death with Dignity).
• England and Wales. MPs backed the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill in June 2025 by 314 to 291. It ran out of time in the House of Lords. A new version was voted down on 11 September 2026 by 286 to 270 (Dignity in Dying).
• Canada. On 7 October 2026, the government said MAID for mental illness alone will stay excluded indefinitely.

For every country and state, see our legal landscape section and statistics section.

Each case on this page can be used to "prove" almost anything. Supporters point to Maynard and Oregon. Opponents point to Foley, Ms. B and Mortier. A fairer approach is to ask the same questions of every case:

1. Who is telling the story, and what do they want to change?
2. Was the person dying, and how soon?
3. What help was offered first: palliative care, mental health care, housing, home support?
4. What did independent review find, and how independent was it?
5. Is this case typical, or rare? What do the annual numbers say?

People of faith often add another question: what do we owe each other at the end of life? The Catholic Church's 2020 letter Samaritanus bonus calls euthanasia always wrong. It also says that being incurable never means care should end (Vatican News). Other faiths answer in their own ways, as our religious views section explains.

Dame Cicely Saunders opened St Christopher's Hospice in London in 1967 and founded the modern hospice movement. She put the goal of end-of-life care this way:

"You matter because you are you, and you matter to the end of your life." — Dame Cicely Saunders (King's College London)

Some questions to sit with:

• If you were Brittany Maynard, what would you want the law to allow?
• If you were Roger Foley, what would you want the law to protect you from?
• Can one law do both? What would it need?

Brittany Maynard wanted a choice, and she did not want to make it for anyone else. More than ten years later, her husband is still telling her story, and the map of laws has changed. Roger Foley wanted help to live, and his story changed the debate too. Both asked for the same basic thing: to be heard, and to be supported to the end. For a balanced summary of the main arguments, see Arguments For and Against.

If reading these stories brings up thoughts of ending your own life, please talk to someone today. The support box at the top of this page lists free, confidential help, or visit our help page.