자해할 권리의 성립 가능성과 후견주의적 제한의 정당성 검토

• 영문명: A Study on Possibility of Right of ‘Harm to Self’ and Justification of Paternalistic Restriction
• 발행기관: 이화여자대학교 생명의료법연구소
• 저자명: 이유경(Rhie, Yuh-kyoung)
• 간행물 정보: 『생명윤리정책연구(제 9권 제 3호 이전)』제7권 제1호, 83~106쪽, 전체 24쪽
• 주제분류: 법학 > 법학
• 파일형태: PDF
• 발행일자: 2013.06.30

영문 초록

Right of ‘harm to self’ as right of freedom originating from constitutional human dignity or Fourteenth·Ninth Amendment conflicts with paternalistic intervention by state. Paternalism is behavior, by state, which limits person’s liberty or autonomy for one’s own good. Paternalism can also imply that the behavior is against or regardless of the will of a person, or also that the behavior expresses an attitude of superiority. This paternalistic restriction causes infringement of personal autonomy right which is enumerable and inviolable as long as it does not violate others’ rights. With the development of modern medical science, in addition to died or fully recovered, patients retain a third alternative: artificially lifeprolonging without restoration of health. Korean and American Supreme Courts permit euthanasia in limited circumstances: passive euthanasia. However, euthanasia is substantially private and not harmful to others or society. Therefore, American courts cite state’s interest as the damage from euthanasia. This attitude can be apprehended that ‘harm to self’ is a victimless act and state’s paternalistic intervention should be conducted in accordance with the Principle of Proportionality which is a solution for restriction of fundamental rights. In order to guarantee one’s autonomy and dignity, active euthanasia need to be reviewed as right of ‘harm to self’ with regard to the Principle of Proportionality.

목차

Ⅰ. 문제의 제기

Ⅱ. 자해할 권리의 성립 가능성

Ⅲ. 제한의 근거로서 후견주의 검토

Ⅳ. 안락사와 관련된 판례 검토

키워드

자해할 권리 후견주의 자기결정권 비례의 원칙 안락사 기본권제한 기본권충돌 right of ‘harm to self’ paternalism personal autonomy rights Principle of Proportionality euthanasia restriction of fundamental rights collision of fundamental rights