<\/p>\n\n\n\n
December 2025<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n \u2026 it is important to inform relatives before an assisted suicide \u2013 but that there is no obligation to do so?<\/strong> Openly communicating one\u2019s wish and decision to end one\u2019s own life can make things considerably easier for loved ones, friends and acquaintances<\/a>, even if, naturally, they react with rejection at first. Based on numerous responses DIGNITAS has received, it is often easier for loved ones to come to terms with and process the impending end of life of someone close to them when they knew about it early on. They report that this gave them the opportunity to talk about things that had previously gone unsaid, to consciously experience and shape the remaining time \u2013 sometimes even to enjoy it \u2013 and to make practical arrangements, such as the wishes of the dying person regarding the farewell ceremony. Many relatives describe this time as sad, but also as valuable and helpful.<\/p>\n\n\n\n DIGNITAS always advises its members who apply for assisted suicide that it is important to involve their loved ones. In most cases, they do so. However, there is no obligation \u2013 nor can there be. This is because the freedom and right to determine one\u2019s own life also includes the freedom and right of a person to decide whom they inform about their decisions. This also applies to voluntary assisted dying, of course.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In principle, the associations conducting the assistance may only disclose information and\/or data to third parties \u2013 be they family members, friends, or other persons \u2013 with the express consent of the individual concerned, the member. What would you say if, for example, you consulted your family doctor, a therapist or another person you trust, and they informed one of your family members without your consent?<\/p>\n\n\n\n There may be personal reasons why someone does not want to inform their relatives and other close persons. These range from fear of negative consequences in a family already burdened by conflict or alienation, up to threats, aggression, stigmatisation, etc. The desire for a peaceful, quiet retreat may also play a role. Additionally, silence is sometimes simply a way of protecting loved ones. In some countries, there may even be criminal consequences. This is the case in the United Kingdom for example, where assisting suicide \u2013 which includes professionally supported assisted dying \u2013 is punishable by up to 14 years\u2019 imprisonment. To date, no relative who supported a loved one on their way to DIGNITAS for compassionate and altruistic reasons has ever been convicted. However, the corresponding investigations by the authorities can be very stressful at an already difficult time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Hence it is not about exclusion, but about responsibility. The freedom to decide for oneself how much closeness to allow does not necessarily imply distance or even malice, but rather respect \u2013 respect for oneself, and for others.<\/p>\n\n\n\n November 2025<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n … the term \u201ctaboo\u201d comes from the Polynesian language?<\/strong> Taboos lose their power when one talks about them. This also applies to suicidal thoughts. Those who find the words to express themselves feel relieved; those who listen without judgement can soothe suffering. Silence, on the other hand, increases the distress. There are many examples of taboos losing their \u201csacred status\u201d and becoming part of everyday life. Take holy water for example: once an exclusive sacred liquid that was only touched during church services, it is now sold in plastic bottles and all kinds of other containers in souvenir shops \u2013 alongside magnets, postcards and key rings. And there it is touched, stirred and shaken by the \u201ccommon folks\u201d, quite unabashedly and without the sublime aura that usually surrounds sacred objects.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So, if things that were once considered untouchable, such as holy water, can become mundane everyday objects, then it should certainly be possible to talk about taboo subjects such as suicidal thoughts. In a relaxed, uncomplicated and relieving manner.<\/p>\n\n\n\n ___ August 2025<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n \u2026 in Switzerland every assisted suicide is investigated by the authorities?<\/strong> These examinations are carried out for every non-natural death. Based on the situation on site and the documents available, it is ensured that in the specific case of assistance in suicide there are no indications of a criminal offence such as inciting suicide, or homicide. Assisted suicide is a criminal offence in Switzerland if it is carried out for selfish motives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n May 2025<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n … exercising a human right does not require \u201cstate authorisation\u201d?<\/strong> February 2025<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n \u2026 there is no such thing as a \u201chealthy person who wants to die\u201d?<\/strong> ___ November 2024<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n … there is no such thing as \u201csuicide tourism\u201d?<\/strong> People who travel to Switzerland for an assisted suicide are neither travelling here for pleasure like tourists, nor do they actually want to die \u2013 yet, in view of their suffering they no longer see any possibility to continue living and have no legal way of exercising the right and freedom to fully self-determine their life\u2019s end at home. The decision to make this journey, the demanding preparation process, and the journey itself require a lot of strength, perseverance and determination. August 2024<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n … DIGNITAS\u2019 advisory work does not focus on assisted dying?<\/strong> May 2024<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n … \u201cassisted dying\u201d does not necessarily mean \u201cassisted suicide\u201d?<\/strong> A list of terms and definitions can be found<\/strong> February 2024<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n \u2026 grief is not necessarily a linear process with a defined starting and end point?<\/strong> [1] https:\/\/www.tc.columbia.edu\/ltelab\/<\/a> November 2023<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n … there is not only a \u201cWerther effect\u201d in connection with media coverage of suicide, but also a \u201cPapageno effect\u201d? <\/strong> ____<\/p>\n\n\n\n * Role of media reports in completed and prevented suicide: Werther v. Papageno effects: <\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cOne should not set upon a long journey without careful preparation, and one should not set upon such journey without having appropriately said goodbye to loved ones.\u201d This statement by DIGNITAS founder Ludwig A. Minelli sums up the association\u2019s stance. Those who decide to make use of voluntary assisted dying should, whenever possible, inform their loved ones in good time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
There, tapu means \u201csacred\u201d or \u201cuntouchable\u201d. It was used to describe things that were beyond worldly reach[1]<\/sup><\/a>. This refers to sacred things that were not to be touched by the \u201ccommon folks\u201d. Tapu can therefore be translated as both \u201csacred, untouchable\u201d and \u201cforbidden\u201d. This second meaning still characterises the term today: taboos are not talked about. Especially not the \u201clast taboo\u201d, dying and death. This is basically understandable, because one\u2019s own mortality, just like that of loved ones, is a topic that one tends to be reluctant to face.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
[1]<\/sup><\/a> Kluge \u2013 Etymologisches W\u00f6rterbuch der deutschen Sprache. De Gruyter, Berlin \/ New York. 24. Auflage, 2002.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
In Switzerland, an assisted suicide is legally classified as an \u201cunusual death\u201d. The accompanying persons are therefore obliged to report the death to the police. The police come on site and report the death to the public prosecutor\u2019s office for the legal investigation and to the medical officer for the examination of the body.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
In many countries, prohibitions still make it impossible to exercise the (human) right and freedom to decide on time and manner of one\u2019s own end in life and to make use of support in doing so. Or narrow laws excessively restrict options.
The assumption, however, that \u201cstate authorisation\u201d is required to exercise a human right is an erroneous one. Human rights always apply. Exercising them does not need to be legitimised by government, parliament, or administrative authorities.
Freedom is a valuable asset. It must always be protected and the exercise of a human right must not be made more difficult or even impossible by patronising, premature and unnecessary prohibitions and regulations. Exercising a right is not an obligation for anyone; this of course also applies to the \u201clast human right\u201d. Everyone is free to decide how they personally feel about assisted suicide and assisted dying in general. Likewise, every individual capable of judgement is free to decide for themselves how and when their suffering and life will end.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
In Switzerland, it was long disputed whether assisted suicide was also permissible for people who do not have an illness in the medical sense. This question has now been clarified. Dr Pierre Beck, former President of EXIT Suisse romande, had provided assisted suicide for an 86-year-old woman who was supposedly healthy, together with her seriously ill husband. The elderly wife had decided that she did not want to continue living without her husband under any circumstances. The case was scrutinized by various courts and no violation of applicable law was found by the Federal Supreme Court.
It should be noted in this context that a serious suffering can also exist even if there is no medical diagnosis as defined in the ICD and ICF classification tables. This also follows from the constitution of the World Health Organisation (WHO): \u201cHealth is a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity\u201d[1]<\/a><\/sup>. The well-being and thus quality of life of someone who, like the woman in Dr Pierre Beck’s case, does not wish to continue living is undoubtedly impaired and the person cannot be considered \u201chealthy\u201d in the sense of this definition.
Someone who wishes to end their life by doctor-supported professional assistance in suicide due to existential suffering is always faced with the challenge to objectivate the suffering they experience subjectively, thus making their end-of-life choice comprehensible for those assisting \u2013 medical doctor, DIGNITAS, authorities, next-of-kin. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
[1]<\/a><\/sup> https:\/\/www.who.int\/about\/governance\/constitution<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
The so-called \u201csuicide tourism\u201d is a disgraceful expression, a creation of scribblers aiming to scandalise assisted suicide through their choice of words in \u2013 intentional or unintentional \u2013 ignorance of the facts. Unfortunately, the term is brought up again on every occasion, currently also in connection with the \u201cSarco\u201d pod.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
No one who has an acceptable option of shaping the end of their own life according to their own wishes where they live will take on such a journey. It is a well-considered and never easy act of self-determination and deserves appropriate and respectful wording in social, political and media discussions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
The DIGNITAS association does not consider itself to be a \u201chelp-to-die\u201d organisation, but a charitable association for helping to live, for preventing suicide attempts, and for human rights. A large part of our work involves practical and legal advice for doctors, lawyers, the sick, the healthy, relatives of the sick, etc. And of course, for suicidal persons too.
When providing advice for someone, the essential question is not \u201chow to die\u201d, but \u201chow to live on\u201d. A wish to die arises when someone no longer sees any possibility to maintain or to achieve a quality of life that they feel is (still) acceptable for them. If the person\u2019s wish for an end to their suffering is taken seriously and they are provided with comprehensive information on viable options for stabilising or improving their quality of life in an open-outcome and taboo-free conversation, without ruling out the option of self-determinedly ending life, they gain freedom of choice \u2013 and will often choose to continue living.
Only few persons who turn to DIGNITAS will request an assisted suicide, and even fewer ultimately choose this option. Knowing that there is a real, legal, professionally accompanied possibility, a kind of \u201cemergency exit\u201d for the time when they feel they really cannot go on living, can provide relief and encourage people to carry on living. This also prevents the distress and suffering from becoming so great that a person resorts to a desperate suicide attempt, which is very likely to fail, with serious consequences for themselves and those around them. Thus, cracking the taboo on dying, death and suicide, as well as providing open-outcome advice exploring all options, including a self-determined end of suffering and life, can prevent suicide attempts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
The term \u201cassisted dying\u201d is somewhat imprecise. In some contexts, it means just assisted suicide, i.e. a person ingesting a lethal medication prescribed by a physician, but it can also include voluntary euthanasia, i.e. a person administering a lethal medication to another on the latter’s request. To add to the confusion, the legal and medical terms used in English-speaking countries and regions vary considerably. In Australia, for example, the term \u201cvoluntary assisted dying (VAD)\u201d is used; in Canada, it is \u201cmedical aid in dying (MAID). Both terms can mean both assisted suicide and voluntary euthanasia.
The correct term for what is allowed in Switzerland is \u201cassisted suicide\u201d; in some countries, the term \u201c[physician] assisted suicide (PAS)\u201d is used. In Swiss law, voluntary euthanasia corresponds to \u201ckilling on demand\u201d and is a punishable crime, just as it is in Germany, Austria, and many other countries.
A heated debate about the correct terminology to be used for assisted dying is going on in France. The draft law currently under discussion uses the vague term \u201caide \u00e0 mourir\u201d, i.e. \u201chelp to die\u201d, with no further precision; in the law\u2019s text, the term \u201csuicide\u201d is avoided altogether, as is \u201ceuthanasia\u201c, which is the medical term commonly used in Belgium and the Netherlands.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
– on the DIGNITAS website<\/a>
– on the website of the World Federation of Right to Die Societies<\/a> (WFRtDS)<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
Grief typically has a clear starting point, for example the loss of a loved one, the expulsion from one\u2019s home country, a serious diagnosis, or the decision of a close person for assisted suicide. In most cases, it does not have a clear end point. It does, however, transform.
Often, grief is discussed in terms of \u201cstages\u201d \u2013 a popular model being Elisabeth K\u00fcbler-Ross’s, which describes the five stages denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance. Although K\u00fcbler-Ross\u2019s model originally referred to the dying process, it is often applied to the grieving process. According to this model, the stages of grief will ideally be experienced sequentially, with acceptance being the final stage. A common assumption is that one should confront one\u2019s own grief and accept the situation at the end of the grieving process. This perspective is associated with the basic assumption that the loss of a close person is being mourned. At the same time, there is the notion that a person\u2019s grief will eventually be over, and that one will \u201cgo back to normal\u201d, i.e. things will be as they were before the event that led to grief.
However, people in grief will realize that grief is not linear and that it comes and goes in waves, in surges; and that there is no clear endpoint to it. Its quality often changes over time: it becomes less overwhelming than at the beginning, the intervals between surges lengthen, and it becomes easier to accept the situation. Grief is thus an individual, multifaceted, and complex process for which there are essentially no rules. It can last for months, even years, and for most people, there remains a \u201cresidual grief\u201d. Notably, some individuals hardly mourn, and\/or they experience grief only briefly. This perspective aligns with current research, with an important figure in this context being George A. Bonanno, a professor at the Loss, Trauma, and Emotion Lab[1]<\/em> at Teachers College, Columbia University.
In dealing with grief, many things are entirely \u201cnormal\u201d, albeit always individual. There is no right or wrong; both the nature and duration of the grieving process depend heavily on the actual event causing the grief and\/or the relationship with the lost person. However, if it is no longer possible to cope with everyday life, to feel joy or to pursue a job, it may be advisable to seek professional support, as this could be signs of a \u201cprolonged grief disorder\u201d. The World Health Organization’s “International Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems\u201d (ICD), states that \u201cprolonged grief disorder\u201d includes \u201csignificant impairment in personal, family, social, educational, occupational or other important areas of functioning\u201d[2]<\/em>.
In any case, it is important to give grief the space and time it needs. Although not pleasant, it is, as much as joy, part of life.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
[2] ICD-11 <\/em>\u201cprolonged grief disorder\u201d
https:\/\/icd.who.int\/browse11\/l-m\/en#\/http:\/\/id.who.int\/icd\/entity\/1183832314<\/a><\/em>
Note<\/strong>: On 30 September 2023, DIGNITAS participated in a panel discussion \u201cHow do we talk about grief?\u201d at the Festival of Ideas in Leeds. Click here<\/a> for more information.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
Appropriate reporting on suicide requires sensitivity on the part of media professionals. When the deceased person is one of public interest and \/ or when the suicide method appears unusual, the \u201cnews value\u201d can be quite tempting for the press. At the same time, however, there is a risk of imitation. The latter has been reasonably well researched and is known as the \u201cWerther effect\u201d, in reference to the tragic hero in Goethe’s epistolary novel \u201cThe Sorrows of Young Werther\u201d of 1774, the publication of which triggered an increase of suicides. Accordingly, the number of suicides may rise following certain forms of media reporting \u2013 for example, if it is particularly sensationalist or provides details about the method.
However, there is also an opposite effect, i.e., one that can help prevent suicides. A team led by Austrian professor Thomas Niederkrotenthaler systematically investigated this \u201cPapageno effect\u201d and described it for the first time in 2010*. According to the study, media coverage can have a protective effect if, for example, alternatives to suicide and \/ or solutions are presented. The portrayal of constructive crisis management and informing about concrete offers of help for people who are thinking about suicide can also be helpful. In addition, removing taboos and creating public awareness of the topic of suicide can have a positive effect.
Just like the Werther effect, this protective effect owes its name to art, namely the character of Papageno from Mozart’s \u201cMagic Flute\u201d. Papageno is prevented from choosing suicide at the last moment by people close to him pointing out alternatives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
https:\/\/pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/20807970\/<\/a>, 31.10.23<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n