In recent years, the number of people seeking euthanasia has dramatically risen, with campaigning to legalise the practice in the UK gaining more traction than ever. But it is not the demographic you would expect to be seeking assisted death; it is young women seeking euthanasia for mental health conditions.
In the Netherlands, eligibility for assisted death starts at twelve-years-old. In 2024, a twenty-nine-year-old woman died by euthanasia in the Netherlands after a long-term battle with mental health issues, such as chronic depression and anxiety. While the process was long, over three years, and not an impulsive decision, Zoraya ter Beek was otherwise healthy. We are consistently taught that recovery from mental health issues is possible, that with correct treatment life can still be lived – so what does Zoraya’s story tell us about hope?
The strict criteria for euthanasia set out by Dutch Law dictates that “a patient is experiencing unbearable suffering with no prospect of improvement”. But mental suffering is more nuanced, it is difficult to objectively argue that there is no prospect at all for improvement. Furthermore, patients seeking euthanasia must have made a “well considered” decision. Making a “well considered” decision during a period of mental illness so severe that the sufferer is seeking death is dubious, how considered can this choice really be. A doctor must then inform the patient on their prognosis, but mental illness can be so unpredictable that confidently mapping out and then explaining the likely course of a person’s condition is impossible. No part of the criteria provided on the government website suggests that euthanasia is an appropriate course of action for mental illness, yet many people have still been successful in attaining this “treatment”.
In 2023, 138 people died by euthanasia in the Netherlands – 16% of these deaths were people under the age of thirty. Twenty-two-year-old Zoë was approved for euthanasia but changed her mind at the very last second. At the age of twenty-two, the amount of lifespan yet to live is astounding: surely there is enough time to give life one more chance? Zoë suffered from various mental health issues, stemming from childhood abuse. She later revisited the euthanasia process, doubting her decision to turn down assisted death, but ultimately, she has since refrained and is still alive today.
One of the driving factors behind Zoë’s desire to die was her risk of homelessness, raising the question of whether her motives were correct. When concerning mental illness, there are so many different factors involved, environmental factors, that it’s impossible to understand all of them – thus making the power to choose euthanasia incredibly dangerous. After making the choice to live, Zoë said “I survived death, so I’ll survive life as well.” She is doing well, presenting an alternative to assisted dying, proving that it is often not the right path to take.
Encouraging mentally ill individuals to explore assisted death as an option is incredibly dangerous; it is tantamount to gross negligence.
Euthanasia is a privately run medical practice. The average estimated cost of the process is around £10,000. A British citizen travels to receive euthanasia every eight days, the number of people travelling into the EU to receive assisted dying is no small number. When such money is involved, it’s difficult not to question the motives behind medical professionals giving the green light. This is not just an emotional issue, but an economic one too. As is always a risk in private medical care, professionals may be more likely to agree to procedures due to the monetary gain – but when the outcome is death, this risk triples. Government support can be seen as motivated by the tourism gained from those travelling in and out of the EU for euthanasia – specifically from the UK and US. Medical tourism is extremely beneficial for the growth of the economy. There is so much room for exploitation. Can we really trust the motives of those running and organising assisted death?
Canada is one of the most recent countries to follow in the footsteps of the Netherlands, as Conservatives backed the legalisation of euthanasia. Currently, one in twenty deaths in Canada are the result of assisted death – a truly staggering statistic. It appears that the criteria for Canadian euthanasia may be slightly more stringent than in the Netherlands – almost 97% of those who have sought assisted death have had “reasonably foreseeable” deaths before the “treatment”. Comparing to the reports of mental health cases in the Netherlands. However, an elderly man, John Scully, has taken part in a video interview in 2024, explaining his mental illness being his motive towards seeking euthanasia in Canada. In comparison, the British Bill that MPs voted on in 2024, and ultimately did not pass, dictated that patients must be expected to die within six months, removing the ability for mental illness to be a factor.
Encouraging mentally ill individuals to explore assisted death as an option is incredibly dangerous; it is tantamount to gross negligence. Based on statistics, and personal testimonies, it seems that young women are the most at risk. I question whether this is fuelled by the societal pressure for women to be caretakers, to be self-sufficient; pushing young women to view themselves as burdens as they suffer mentally. There is a gender divide, promoting and enforcing dangerous beliefs. Young women are being exploited, whether by societal expectations or by the economic gain of the EU.
My perspective on this is less removed, as a young woman who suffers from depression and PTSD, I have to question what these stories mean to me. Do I applaud these other women for taking control of their narratives, or do I feel hopelessness that those similar to me felt death was the only way forward? I tend to lean towards the latter.
In my darkest moments as a teenager, I am grateful I never viewed death as a state-authorised solution.
Euthanasia can help people die with dignity, people who would spend years dying from terminal illnesses- this is true, but one circumstance does not justify another. Euthanasia in young people suffering from mental illness is a failure, and one that cannot keep being swept under the rug. Young, especially mentally unwell, people need to be safeguarded far better. Society’s weakest are becoming the first to be let go.
Leave a Reply