(LifeSiteNews) — On August 13, Uruguay’s lower house of parliament voted to decriminalize euthanasia, with 64 votes in favor in the 99-seat Chamber of Representatives. Ninety-three lawmakers were present for the vote. Reuters described the nearly all-night debate as “emotional.” The law will permit “mentally competent adults” with “terminal or incurable diseases” to request euthanasia. The Uruguayan senate is expected to vote in favor of the legislation before the end of the year.
The law, like those in other countries, was pushed under the guise of compassion; the bill was titled the “Dignified Death Law.” The phrase “dying with dignity” has been the death lobby’s most effective slogan, and few appear to notice the insidious implication behind it: That for the suffering to die with dignity, they must die faster – by lethal injection, administered by a medical professional. Indeed, while the Uruguayan law emphasizes the necessity of “express and repeated consent,” the legalization of euthanasia for “incurable” illnesses will inevitably include many conditions that are not terminal.
In Uruguay, as elsewhere, the bill passed after repeated attempts by euthanasia activists. In 2022, a euthanasia bill passed the lower parliament but was not signed into law. An amendment was added to gain enough support to ensure its passage this time around – a requirement that a medical board review each euthanasia application if the two doctors required to sign off disagree on the case. This “safeguard,” it must be noted, has not been effective at preventing the vulnerable from being euthanized in Canada and elsewhere, but it convinced previously skeptical lawmakers.
President Yamandú Orsi stated that he supports the euthanasia bill, “so long as extreme care and safeguards are taken.” Other euthanasia regimes provide ample evidence that the “slippery slope” is not fallacious fearmongering, but demonstrable inevitability.
Luis Gallo, the parliamentarian who spearheaded the debate, insisted that euthanasia is necessary. “Let’s not forget that the request is strictly personal: it respects the free and individual will of the patient, without interference, because it concerns their life, their suffering, their decision not to continue living,” he stated. Of course, euthanasia involves a third party and thus is not a “strictly personal” decision; it involves decisions made by doctors, medical staff, and the board tasked with approving such decisions. (Gallo is a member of the leftist Broad Front ruling coalition.)
The new legislation is part of a broad, aggressive leftist agenda in Uruguay, which has included legalizing homosexual “marriage” (2013), abortion (2012), and marijuana use (2013). The death lobby is hoping that Uruguay’s move signals a broader trend in predominantly Catholic Latin America – Ecuador legalized euthanasia in some circumstances after the Constitutional Court decriminalized it last year (although abortion remains illegal in most cases); Communist Cuba legalized euthanasia as part of a sweeping healthcare-related bill in 2024; and Colombia legalized euthanasia back in 1997.
The Episcopal Conference of Uruguay (CEU) published a statement after the vote, with the bishops expressing their grief at its passage and referring to an April statement they had released after the bill was announced titled “Facing the End of Life with Love.” They cited Uruguayan law, which stipulates that it is not “ethically acceptable to cause the death of a patient … active euthanasia, understood as ‘the action or omission that accelerates or causes the death of a patient, is contrary to the ethics of the profession.’”
The law also states that “killing a patient is unethical, even to spare them pain and suffering, even if they expressly request it.” The CEU noted that they remain grateful to those Uruguayans who work diligently for a “culture of care, respect for the gift of life, and support for those who, due to their illness, are in a vulnerable situation.”
