Creating a safer and better functioning system: Lessons to be learned from the Netherlands for an ethical defence of an autonomy‐only approach to assisted dying

The proposal to allow assisted dying for people who are not severely ill reignited the Dutch end‐of‐life debate when it was submitted in 2016. A key criticism of this proposal is that it is too radical a departure from the safe and well‐functioning system the Netherlands already has. The goal of this article is to respond to this criticism and question whether the Dutch system really can be described as safe and well functioning. I will reconsider the usefulness of the suffering criterion, and I will ultimately argue this criterion should be rejected altogether. Instead, we should consider moving towards an autonomy‐only approach to assisted dying. This would resolve some significant issues occurring under the current system of assisted dying in the Netherlands and ultimately make the process safer and better functioning. I will then consider some possible objections to adopting an autonomy‐only approach and provide some preliminary responses to these also. I will finally highlight some potential areas where further research may be necessary, namely, how to mitigate the effect of external factors such as poverty or other life aspects that may have the potential to distort the individual's ability to make autonomous decisions. I will also consider some possible international lessons that can be taken from both current as well as the proposed practice in the Netherlands.