THE CORRELATION BETWEEN THE RIGHT TO DEATH AND THE RIGHT TO DIGNIFIED DEATH
Authors: Buletsa S. B. 
Published: April 2021

In the context of the disclosure of the subject of research both to achieve the goal of scientific research and to ensure the completeness, objectivity, reliability and persuasiveness of the results, the author used a set of general and special methods that are characteristic of legal science. In particular, the origin and long historical path of development of these human rights were studied with the help of the historical method. Using a system-structural method formulated the general structure of the study, and dialectical - analyzed the provisions of law and case law on the specifics of the right to die. Using a comparative legal method, the legislation of foreign countries was analyzed, which provided an opportunity to use their positive experience in terms of analysis of the right to death.
This article reveals the scientific approaches of researchers to determine the nature of death, the right to die, the right to a dignified death, to identify their features and to distinguish between them. The paper analyzes ways to protect the right to die. Part of the work is devoted to the analysis of the law enforcement practice of the European Court of Human Rights, both in general on the possibility and expediency of the existence of certain criteria for restricting the right to life.
Based on the study, it is concluded that death and the right to die, the right to die and the right to a dignified death are correlated as primary and secondary, ie the right to die includes all these concepts. They cannot exist without each other. In different countries they are interpreted differently, but the main thing is the free will of a person to die who has an incurable disease. It is argued that it is best to use the term right to a dignified death. It is noted that a significant number of foreign countries provide for the right to die and euthanasia.
In the context of the disclosure of the subject of research both to achieve the goal of scientific research and to ensure the completeness, objectivity, reliability and persuasiveness of the results, the author used a set of general and special methods that are characteristic of legal science. In particular, the origin and long historical path of development of these human rights were studied with the help of the historical method. Using a system-structural method formulated the general structure of the study, and dialectical - analyzed the provisions of law and case law on the specifics of the right to die. Using a comparative legal method, the legislation of foreign countries was analyzed, which provided an opportunity to use their positive experience in terms of analysis of the right to death.
This article reveals the scientific approaches of researchers to determine the nature of death, the right to die, the right to a dignified death, to identify their features and to distinguish between them. The paper analyzes ways to protect the right to die. Part of the work is devoted to the analysis of the law enforcement practice of the European Court of Human Rights, both in general on the possibility and expediency of the existence of certain criteria for restricting the right to life.
Based on the study, it is concluded that death and the right to die, the right to die and the right to a dignified death are correlated as primary and secondary, ie the right to die includes all these concepts. They cannot exist without each other. In different countries they are interpreted differently, but the main thing is the free will of a person to die who has an incurable disease. It is argued that it is best to use the term right to a dignified death. It is noted that a significant number of foreign countries provide for the right to die and euthanasia.
The right to die "follows" from the right to life. However, the concepts of "life" and "right to life" are complex and very ambiguous categories that provoke a lively social and scientific discussion, the content and nature, in particular the legal nature, the right to die, seem even more ambiguous. The question of death has long been considered by various sciences, philosophy, psychology, law. Every year, various scientists raise the issue of the right to die or the human right to a dignified death in scientific circles. Among modern philosophers, the issue of death is, for example, Shelley Kagan, who took a course at Yale University. Everyone has a different attitude to death, someone denies the existence of the right to die at all, someone claims that a person has the right to decide for himself the question of his death (suicide) or to receive help to die with dignity.
The purpose of this article is to study the relationship between the right to die and the right to a dignified death, their place in the legal system of Ukraine and European countries. Defining their essence, the ratio of these concepts, disclosing their features, as well as the experience of the European Court of Human Rights in their protection and implementation.
If the basis for exercising the right to life is exhaustive, then in this case the goal of health care cannot be achieved, because the application of medical care to the patient only exacerbates his suffering. The right to life provides the opportunity to independently dispose of life, ie to expose it to significant risk (stuntman), to voluntarily decide on the timing and methods of its termination (suicide) - the right to die. However, this right will never be enshrined in law. In India, by contrast, by 2017, a failed suicide attempt was considered a crime under Article 309 of the Indian Penal Code of 1860, and was punishable by simple imprisonment for up to one year (or a fine, or both). On April 7, 2017, the Indian Mental Health Act came into force, suicide is a psychiatric problem and not a manifestation of criminal instinct, there is a presumption of severe stress in the event of a suicide attempt, i.e. any person attempting suicide is considered if not proved another that is under great stress and is not punishable.