El suicidio es un delito en algunas partes del mundo. [1] Sin embargo, aunque el suicidio ha sido despenalizado en muchos países, el acto está estigmatizado y desalentado casi universalmente. En algunos contextos, el suicidio podría utilizarse como una expresión extrema de libertad, como lo ejemplifica su uso como expresión de devoto disenso hacia la tiranía o injusticia percibidas, lo que ocurrió ocasionalmente en culturas como la antigua Roma , el Japón medieval o la actual Región Autónoma del Tíbet .
Si bien una persona que se ha suicidado está fuera del alcance de la ley, aún puede haber consecuencias legales en relación con el tratamiento del cadáver o el destino de los bienes o los miembros de la familia de la persona. Las cuestiones asociadas con la asistencia al suicidio y el intento de suicidio también han sido abordadas por las leyes de algunas jurisdicciones. Algunos países penalizan los intentos de suicidio .
En la antigua Atenas , a una persona que se había suicidado (sin la aprobación del estado) se le negaban los honores de un entierro normal. La persona era enterrada sola, en las afueras de la ciudad, sin lápida ni placa. [2]
En 1670, Luis XIV promulgó una ordenanza penal mucho más severa que la que se aplicaba a los cadáveres que ya estaban muertos: se arrastraba el cadáver por las calles boca abajo y luego se colgaba o se tiraba a un montón de basura. Además, se confiscaban todos los bienes de la persona; esta medida pretendía disuadir el suicidio castigando económicamente a sus herederos . [3]
La Ley de enterramientos (felo de se) de 1882 abolió el requisito legal en Inglaterra de enterrar a los suicidas en las encrucijadas. [a] [4]
En muchas jurisdicciones , es un delito ayudar a otras personas, directa o indirectamente, a quitarse la vida. Dicha legislación exige que los fabricantes de armas se nieguen a venderlas a quienes se considere que corren un riesgo potencial de suicidio. En algunas jurisdicciones, también es ilegal alentar a las personas a intentar suicidarse, aunque la clasificación del delito y su castigo varían. A veces se aplica una excepción para el suicidio asistido por un médico , bajo condiciones estrictas.
En el estado australiano de Victoria , si bien el suicidio en sí ya no es un delito, un sobreviviente de un pacto suicida puede ser acusado de homicidio en lugar de asesinato si mató a la parte fallecida. [132] Además, es un delito aconsejar, incitar o ayudar e instigar a otra persona a intentar suicidarse, y la ley permite explícitamente que cualquier persona use "la fuerza que sea razonablemente necesaria" para evitar que otra se suicide.
El 29 de noviembre de 2017, el estado de Victoria aprobó la Ley de muerte asistida voluntaria , que legaliza la asistencia médica a pacientes terminales con menos de seis meses de vida para que puedan poner fin a su vida. La ley entró en vigor el 19 de junio de 2019. [133]
El 17 de septiembre de 2021, el estado de Queensland aprobó la Ley de muerte asistida voluntaria de 2021. [134] [135] La ley entró en vigor el 1 de enero de 2023. [135]
Los gobiernos del Territorio de la Capital Australiana (ACT) habían defendido regularmente el derecho a legalizar los programas relacionados con la eutanasia entre 1997 y 2022, cuando la prohibición federal estaba en vigor. Poco después de que se derogara la prohibición federal, el gobierno del ACT confirmó que intentaría presentar una legislación en la Asamblea Legislativa del ACT en 2023 para permitir la muerte asistida voluntaria. [136] El gobierno abrió un período de consulta formal en febrero de 2023, [137] que culminó con un informe que respaldaba el establecimiento de un plan de muerte asistida voluntaria, publicado el 29 de junio de 2023. [138] El 31 de octubre de 2023, el Proyecto de Ley de Muerte Asistida Voluntaria de 2023 se presentó en la Asamblea Legislativa e inmediatamente se remitió a un comité selecto para una consulta adicional, para que informe antes del 29 de febrero de 2024. [139] [140] Según la legislación actual, una persona sería elegible para la muerte asistida voluntaria si tiene más de 18 años, la busca voluntariamente con capacidad para tomar decisiones, sufre de manera intolerable una enfermedad avanzada o progresiva que se espera que cause la muerte y vive cerca del ACT durante al menos 12 meses o con una conexión significativa con Canberra. [141]
El 21 de septiembre de 2017, el diputado del Partido Nacional Trevor Khan presentó el proyecto de ley de muerte asistida voluntaria de 2017 en el Parlamento de Nueva Gales del Sur . El proyecto de ley se inspiró en la Ley de muerte digna de Oregón y fue desarrollado por un grupo de trabajo interpartidario que consideró 72 propuestas "sustanciales". [142] El proyecto de ley contenía lo que los defensores etiquetaron como una "serie de salvaguardas", incluida una junta de supervisión de siete personas para revisar todas las muertes asistidas. [143] La cámara alta debatió el proyecto de ley a lo largo de varias sesiones en noviembre de 2017 y el 16 de noviembre el proyecto de ley fue rechazado por 20 votos a 19. [144]
En octubre de 2021, el diputado independiente Alex Greenwich presentó el proyecto de ley de muerte asistida voluntaria en la cámara baja del Parlamento. [145] La legislación fue sometida a una votación de conciencia entre partidos , después de que el primer ministro y líder del Partido Liberal, Dominic Perrottet, indicara que concedería a los miembros liberales una votación de conciencia. [146] [147] La legislación fue aprobada en la Asamblea Legislativa el 26 de noviembre de 2021 por 52 votos contra 32, y pasó al Consejo Legislativo . [145] [148] El proyecto de ley fue aprobado por el Consejo Legislativo por 23 votos contra 15 el 19 de mayo de 2022, con enmiendas adjuntas, que fueron aprobadas por la Asamblea ese mismo día. [145] [149] La legislación recibió la sanción real el 27 de mayo de 2022 y entrará en vigor 18 meses después. [150]
Según las disposiciones de la legislación, una persona puede presentar una solicitud de muerte asistida voluntaria a un médico especialista, que se presenta ante la Junta de Muerte Asistida Voluntaria. [151] Si el médico está convencido de que la persona tiene la capacidad de tomar la decisión y lo hace de forma voluntaria y determina que la persona cumple los criterios (es decir, tiene una enfermedad terminal que resultará en la muerte en un plazo de seis meses, o una condición neurodegenerativa que resultará en la muerte en un plazo de 12 meses, y cuyo sufrimiento es tal que crea una condición dolorosa que no se puede aliviar de forma tolerable), puede aprobar la solicitud. [151] El mismo proceso debe ser seguido luego por un segundo médico independiente. [151] La persona puede entonces presentar una solicitud por escrito declarando su intención de terminar con su vida, que debe ser presenciada por dos personas y luego presentada a la junta. Se debe presentar una solicitud final cinco días después y el primer médico debe realizar una revisión, que luego puede solicitar a la Junta de Muerte Asistida Voluntaria que le permita el acceso a una sustancia para terminar con la vida de su paciente. [151] La persona puede administrarse la sustancia pertinente por sí misma o encargarle que lo haga un profesional de la salud. [151]
La eutanasia fue legalizada en el Territorio del Norte de Australia , por la Ley de Derechos de los Enfermos Terminales de 1995. Aprobó la Asamblea Legislativa del Territorio del Norte por una votación de 15 a 10. En agosto de 1996 se presentó un proyecto de ley de derogación ante el Parlamento, pero fue derrotado por 14 votos a 11. [152] La ley fue posteriormente anulada por la Ley de Leyes de Eutanasia de 1997 , [ cita requerida ] que es una ley federal que estuvo en vigor hasta el 13 de diciembre de 2022 [ cita requerida ] e impidió que los parlamentos de los territorios (específicamente el Territorio del Norte, el Territorio de la Capital Australiana y la Isla Norfolk ) legalizaran la eutanasia o la muerte asistida. Antes de que ocurriera la anulación federal, tres personas murieron mediante suicidio asistido por un médico bajo la legislación, con la ayuda del Dr. Philip Nitschke . La primera persona fue un carpintero, Bob Dent , que murió el 22 de septiembre de 1996. [153]
En noviembre de 2018, la primera ministra de Queensland, Annastacia Palaszczuk , inició una investigación sobre la posible legalización de la muerte asistida voluntaria en el estado. La investigación también tuvo en cuenta la atención a los ancianos, el final de la vida y los cuidados paliativos. [155]
En mayo de 2021, Palaszczuk anunció que se presentaría al Parlamento de Queensland una legislación sobre muerte asistida voluntaria para su consideración. [156] El proyecto de ley permitiría la eutanasia, si el paciente cumple los siguientes criterios: [157]
El 16 de septiembre de 2021, la Asamblea Legislativa de Queensland aprobó la Ley de Muerte Asistida Voluntaria de 2021 con 61 votos a favor y 31 en contra. [158] La legislación fue sometida a una votación de conciencia . [159] Recibió la sanción real el 23 de septiembre de 2021 y entró en vigor el 1 de enero de 2023. [160]
En noviembre de 2016, la Asamblea Legislativa de Australia del Sur rechazó por un estrecho margen un proyecto de ley de un miembro privado que habría legalizado el derecho a solicitar la eutanasia voluntaria en circunstancias en las que una persona sufre un dolor insoportable y una enfermedad terminal. El proyecto de ley fue el primer proyecto de ley sobre eutanasia que pasó una segunda etapa de lectura (27 votos a favor y 19 en contra), aunque fue rechazado durante el debate de las cláusulas del proyecto de ley (23 votos en total, con el voto decisivo del Presidente en contra del proyecto de ley). [163]
A fines de junio de 2021, el Parlamento de Australia del Sur aprobó un proyecto de ley sobre eutanasia voluntaria similar al de otros estados . [164] La legislación refleja la mayoría de las disposiciones de la ley victoriana , aunque también permite que los hospitales privados y los médicos individuales se opongan por conciencia a participar en el plan, siempre que remitan a los pacientes a un lugar donde puedan acceder al plan. Los residentes en centros de atención a personas mayores y residencias de jubilados también pueden acceder al plan en sus propios hogares o unidades. [164] La Ley de muerte asistida voluntaria de 2021 entró en vigor el 31 de enero de 2023. [165] [166] [167] [168]
Tasmania came close to legalising voluntary euthanasia in November 2013, when a Greens-initiated voluntary euthanasia bill was narrowly defeated in the House of Assembly by a vote of 13–12. The bill would have allowed terminally ill Tasmanians to end their lives 10 days after making three separate requests to their doctor. Although both major parties allowed a conscience vote, all ten Liberals voted against the legislation, with Labor splitting seven in favour and three against, and all five Greens voting in favour.[171]
In December 2019, independent Legislative Council member Mike Gaffney announced he would introduce a private member's bill to legalise voluntary assisted dying the following year.[172] The End of Life Choices (Voluntary Assisted Dying) Bill was introduced to the Council on 27 August and was passed on 10 November 2020, without a formal vote being recorded. It proceeded to the Legislative Assembly, where it was passed with amendments attached on 4 March 2021 by 16 votes to 6.[173][174] After the Council approved of the Assembly's amendments,[175] the legislation received royal assent on 22 April 2021.[176] The legislation went into effect on 23 October 2022.[177]
Under the provisions of the legislation, in order to access the scheme a person must be at least 18 years of age, have decision-making capacity, be acting voluntarily and be suffering intolerably from a medical condition that is advanced, incurable, irreversible and will cause the person's death in the next six months, or 12 months for neurodegenerative disorders.[175] The person must also be an Australian citizen or have resided in the country for at least three continuous years, and for at least 12 months in Tasmania immediately before making their first request. In total three separate requests must be made to access the scheme, each of which comes with progressively more stringent checks and balances.[175]
Since 19 June 2019, Victoria permits assisted dying. On 20 September 2017, the Voluntary Assisted Dying Bill 2017 was introduced into the Victorian Parliament by the Andrews Labor Government, permitting assisted suicide. The bill was modelled on the recommendations of an expert panel chaired by former Australian Medical Association president Professor Brian Owler.[178] The bill passed the parliament, with amendments made in the Legislative Council, on 29 November 2017. The upper house voted in favour 22 votes to 18. The lower house voted in favour 47 votes to 37.[179] In passing the bill, Victoria became the first state to legislate for voluntary assisted dying (VAD). The law received royal assent on 5 December 2017 and came into effect on 19 June 2019.[179][180][181] Implementation of the legislation was an ongoing process which took approximately 18 months.[182][183] Challenges identified with implementation which were by noted by the Medical Journal of Australia included restricting access to those who were eligible, while ensuring it did not unfairly prevent those who were eligible from accessing it and translating the legislation into appropriate clinical practice, as well as supporting and managing doctors with conscientious objections.[182]
Under the provisions of the legislation, assisted suicide (otherwise referred to as voluntary assisted dying) may be available in Victoria under the following conditions:[184]
Other processes and safeguards associated with the scheme are in place.[184]
In November 2018 the McGowan Government announced it would introduce an assisted dying bill early in the new year.[187]
On 10 December 2019, the Voluntary Assisted Dying Act 2019 passed the Western Australian Parliament.[188] The legislation had passed the Legislative Council by 24 votes to 11, having previously passed the Legislative Assembly 45 votes to 11.[189] Under the legislation, an eligible person would have to be terminally ill with a condition that is causing intolerable suffering and is likely to cause death within six months, or 12 months for a neurodegenerative condition. The person would have to make two verbal requests and one written request, with each request signed off by two independent doctors. Self-administration of lethal medication is then permitted, though in a departure from the Victorian system, a patient can choose for a medical practitioner to administer the drug.[188][190] The legislation goes into effect on a day to be fixed by proclamation, though the government has advised of an 18-month implementation period.[188][191] The law went into effect on 1 July 2021.[192][193]
The common-law crimes of attempting suicide and of assisting suicide were codified in Canada when Parliament enacted the Criminal Code in 1892. It carried a maximum penalty of 2 years' imprisonment.[194] Eighty years later, in 1972, Parliament repealed the offence of attempting suicide from the Criminal Code based on the argument that a legal deterrent was unnecessary.[195] The prohibition on assisting suicide remained, as s 241 of the Criminal Code:
However, the law against assisted suicide, including physician-assisted suicide, was the subject of much debate including two reports of the Law Reform Commission of Canada in 1982 and 1983, though these did not support changing the law.[197]
In 1993, the offence of assisted suicide survived a constitutional challenge in the Supreme Court of Canada, in the case of Rodriguez v. British Columbia (Attorney General). The plaintiff, Sue Rodriguez, had been diagnosed with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) in early 1991. She wished to be able to die of suicide at a time of her own choosing but would require assistance to do so because her physical condition prevented her from doing so without assistance. By a 5-4 majority, the Court held that the prohibition on assisted suicide did not infringe s 7 of the Canadian Charter of RIghts and Freedoms, which provides constitutional protection for liberty and security of the person. The majority held that while the law did affect those rights, it did so in a manner consistent with the principles of fundamental justice. The majority also held that the prohibition on assisted suicide did not infringe the Charter's prohibition against cruel and unusual treatment or punishment. Assuming the prohibition did discriminate on basis of disability, the majority held that the infringement was a justifiable restriction under s 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.[198][199][200]
In 1995 the Senate issued a report on assisted suicide entitled Of Life and Death.[199] In 2011, the Royal Society of Canada published its report on end-of-life decision-making.[201] In the report it recommended that the Criminal Code be modified so as to permit assistance in dying under some circumstances.[202] In 2012, a Select Committee on Dying with Dignity of the Quebec National Assembly produced a report recommending amendments to legislation to recognize medical aid in dying as being an appropriate component of end-of-life care.[203] That report resulted in An Act respecting end-of-life care, which came into force on December 10, 2015.[202][203][204]
On June 15, 2012, in Carter v Canada (AG), the British Columbia Supreme Court ruled that the criminal offence prohibiting physician assistance of suicide was unconstitutional on the grounds that denying people access to assisted suicide in hard cases was contrary to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantee of equality under Section 15.[195][205]This decision was subsequently overturned by the majority of the British Columbia Court of Appeal (2:1) on the basis that the issue had already been decided by the Supreme Court of Canada in the Rodriguez case, invoking stare decisis.
A landmark Supreme Court of Canada decision on February 6, 2015[206] overturned the 1993 Rodriguez decision that had ruled against this method of dying. The unanimous decision in the further appeal of Carter v Canada (AG), stated that a total prohibition of physician-assisted death is unconstitutional.[207] The court's ruling limits exculpation of physicians engaging physician-assisted death to hard cases of "a competent adult person who clearly consents to the termination of life and has a grievous and irremediable medical condition, including an illness, disease or disability, that causes enduring suffering that is intolerable to the individual in the circumstances of his or her condition." The ruling was suspended for 12 months to allow the Canadian parliament to draft a new, constitutional law to replace the existing one.[208]
Specifically, the Supreme Court held that the current legislation was overbroad in that it prohibits "physician‑assisted death for a competent adult person who (1) clearly consents to the termination of life and (2) has a grievous and irremediable medical condition (including an illness, disease or disability) that causes enduring suffering that is intolerable to the individual in the circumstances of his or her condition." The court decision includes a requirement that there must be stringent limits that are "scrupulously monitored." This will require the death certificate to be completed by an independent medical examiner, not the treating physician, to ensure the accuracy of reporting the cause of death.[209]
The federal government of 2015 subsequently requested a six-month extension for implementation; the arguments for this request were scheduled to be heard by the Supreme Court in January 2016.[210]
The Canadian Medical Association (CMA) reported that not all doctors would be willing to help a patient die. The belief in late 2015 was that no physician would be forced to do so. The CMA was already offering educational sessions to members as to the process that would be used after the legislation had been implemented.[210]
The Indian penal code 309 deals with punishment for attempted suicide. The Mental Health Care Act 2017 greatly limits the scope for the code to be implemented.[211] The bill states, "Any person who attempts to commit suicide shall be presumed, unless proved otherwise, to have severe stress and shall not be tried and punished under the said Code".[212] State governments are required to provide adequate care and rehabilitation for such individuals as to prevent a recurrence of an attempt to suicide.
The act of suicide has not been criminalized in the penal law of the Islamic Republic of Iran.[213] However, no one is allowed to ask another to kill him/her.[213] In addition, threatening to kill oneself is not an offense by the law, however if this act of threatening is done by a prisoner in a prison, then that would be considered as violation of the prisons' regulations and the offender may be punished according to penal law.[213]
According to the Act. 836 of the civil law of the Islamic Republic of Iran if a suicidal person prepares for suicide and writes a testament, if he/she dies, then by law the will is considered void and if he/she does not die, then the will is officially accepted and can be carried out.[214]
According to the theory of "borrowed crime", suicide itself is not a crime in penal law and thus any type of assistance in an individual's suicide is not considered a crime and the assistant is not punished.[215] Assisting in suicide is considered a crime only when it becomes the "cause" of the suicidal person's death; for example when someone takes advantage of someone else's unawareness or simplicity and convince him/her to kill him/herself. In such cases assisting in suicide is treated as murder and the offender is punished accordingly.[213][215] In addition, assisting in suicide is considered a crime under section 2 of the Act. 15 of the cyber crimes law of the Islamic Republic of Iran which was legislated on June 15, 2009. According to the mentioned act, any type of encouragement, stimulation, invitation, simplification of access to lethal substances and/or methods and teaching of suicide with the help of computer or any other media network is considered assisting in suicide and thus, is punished by imprisonment from 91 days up to one year or fines from five to 20 million Iranian Rials or both.[213]
Attempted suicide is not a criminal offence in Ireland and, under Irish law, self-harm is not generally seen as a form of attempted suicide. It was decriminalized in 1993.[216] Assisted suicide and euthanasia are illegal. This has been challenged in the High Court in 2012. As of 2014[update], assisted suicide remains illegal in Ireland.
Under section 309 of the Penal Code of Malaysia, whoever attempts to commit suicide, and does any act towards the commission of such offence, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year or with fine or with both.[217] There are ongoing efforts to decriminalize attempted suicide, although rights groups and non-governmental organisations such as the local chapter of Befrienders note that progress has been slow.[218][219] Proponents of decriminalization argue that suicide legislation may deter people from seeking help, and may even strengthen the resolve of would-be suicides to end their lives to avoid prosecution.[220] The first reading of a bill to repeal Section 309 of the Penal Code was tabled in Parliament in April 2023, bringing Malaysia one step closer towards decriminalizing attempted suicide.[221]
On 22nd May 2023, the Dewan Rakyat unanimously passed a bill to decriminalised suicide while the upper House (Dewan Negara) passed it on 21st June 2023.[222][223]
In the Netherlands, being present and giving moral support during someone's suicide is not a crime; neither is supplying general information on suicide techniques. However, it is a crime to participate in the preparation for or execution of a suicide, including supplying lethal means or instruction in their use.
As with many other western societies, New Zealand has, since the 1961 Crimes Act, had no laws against suicide in itself,[224] as a personal and unassisted act. Assisted suicide and voluntary euthanasia will be legal in certain circumstances as from November 2021.[225]
Neither suicide nor attempted suicide is illegal in Norway. However, complicity is.[226]
Suicide itself is not illegal in Romania, however encouraging or facilitating the suicide of another person is a criminal offense and is punishable by maximum 20 years imprisonment, depending on circumstances.[227]
In Russia, a person whose mental disorder "poses a direct danger to themself"[verification needed] can be put into a psychiatric hospital. In addition, after hospitalization in a psychiatric hospital, such a citizen of the Russian Federation may be subject to medical restrictions in the form of a driver's license or non-admission to obtain them, as well as such citizens are not allowed to serve in the army, police and other law enforcement agencies and many other restrictions on employment.
In practice, this happens as follows: A failed suicider, detained by the police, for example, is taken to the department, then a psychiatric ambulance is called, a psychiatrist on duty who arrives at the scene decides whether a citizen detained by the police needs hospitalization. In case of hospitalization in a psychiatric hospital, the patient is placed in a ward of enhanced supervision for the first three days, then transferred to the suicidology department. In most cases, such citizens are kept in hospital for no more than one month, in rare cases longer, but very rarely they are discharged less than a month after hospitalization.
Incitement to suicide:
Inciting someone to suicide by threats, cruel treatment, or systematic humiliation is punishable by up to 5 years in prison. (Article 110 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation)
Federal law of Russian Federation no. 139-FZ of 2012-07-28 prescribes censorship of information about methods of suicide on the Internet. According to a website created by the Pirate Party of Russia, some pages with suicide jokes have been blacklisted, which may have led to blocking of an IP address of Wikia.[228][229]
Suicide has been decriminalized since 5 May 2019, with the passing of the Criminal Law Reform Act,[230][231] which repealed Section 309[232] of the Singapore Penal Code. The law took effect on 1 January 2020.[73]
South African courts, including the Appellate Division, have ruled that suicide and attempted suicide are not crimes under the Roman-Dutch law, or that if they ever were crimes, they have been abrogated by disuse. Attempted suicide was from 1886 to 1968 a crime in the Transkei, a former bantustan, under the Transkeian Territories Penal Code.[233]
Suicide was never a statutory criminal offence. English common law perceived suicide as an immoral, criminal offence against God and also against the Crown.[234] The common law offence of felo de se was used to punish people who had attempted suicide and their surviving relatives. A person who had died by suicide could have been denied burial, or their estate forfeited to the Crown, while survivors of suicide attempts could be punished by probation orders (by far the most common sanction) imprisonment or, more rarely, a fine.[235][236] Posthumous punishment stopped in the 19th century, and appetite for punishing survivors of suicide attempts waned until this was decriminalized by the passing of the Suicide Act 1961 and the Criminal Justice Act (Northern Ireland) 1966; these same acts made it an offence to assist in a suicide.
With respect to civil law the simple act of suicide is lawful but the consequences of dying by suicide might turn an individual event into an unlawful act, as in the case of Reeves v Commissioners of Police of the Metropolis [2000] 1 AC 360,[237] where a man in police custody hanged himself and was held equally liable with the police (a cell door defect enabled the hanging) for the loss suffered by his widow; the practical effect was to reduce the police damages liability by 50%. In 2009, the House of Lords ruled that the law concerning the treatment of people who accompanied those who died of assisted suicide was unclear, following Debbie Purdy's case that this lack of clarity was a breach of her human rights. (In her case, as someone with multiple sclerosis, she wanted to know whether her husband would be prosecuted for accompanying her abroad where she might eventually wish to die of assisted suicide, if her illness progressed).
Suicide was never a statutory criminal offence. Under Scots Law, survivors of suicide attempts may be arrested and prosecuted for associated common law offences such as breach of the peace or culpable and reckless conduct.[238][239] Although the Scottish Government has never legislated to formally decriminalize suicide, a 2009 Appeal Court case, which found that a breach of the peace must have an element of disruption to the community, substantially reduced the likelihood of securing a successful prosecution for suicide attempts.[240] Subsequently the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service instructed Police Scotland to deal with cases of attempted suicide which come to their notice by means other than arrest, even where an offence such as breach of the peace may have been committed. Police Scotland has advised officers:[241]
...persons attempting or threatening suicide were no longer to be arrested for a breach of the peace unless the actions have caused or threatened to cause injury to another or endangered or threatened to another person's safety (e.g. threatening to jump from a bridge onto a motorway)... As a result of the COPFS direction, the common law charge of Suicidal Breach of the Peace is no longer competent in the vast majority of cases involving people in mental health crisis. Officers should refrain from using it to simply utilise the power of arrest and place someone in custody because it's operationally expedient to do so.
Despite these recommendations, occasional arrests and prosecutions for suicide attempts continue.[242] Consequential liability upon a person attempting suicide (or if dead, his/her estate) might arise under civil law where it parallels the civil liabilities recognized in the (English Law) Reeves case mentioned above.
Assisting a suicide in Scotland can in some circumstances constitute murder, culpable homicide, or no offence depending upon the facts of each case. No modern examples of cases devoid of direct application of intentional or unintentional harm (such as helping a person to inject themselves) seem to be available; it was noted in a consultation preceding the introduction of the Assisted Suicide (Scotland) Bill that "the law appears to be subject to some uncertainty, partly because of a lack of relevant case law".[243]
In the United States of America, some topics are determined by federal law whereas others differ across states. The information on suicide prevention legislation will be discussed at the federal level first and will be followed by those states that have some form of legislation.
In 2004, Congress passed the Garrett Lee Smith Memorial Act (GLSMA). The GLSMA made federal funding available for the first time to states, tribes, and colleges across the nation to implement community-based youth and young adult suicide prevention programs.[244] Many of these programs had goals based on the National Suicide Prevention Strategy that was designed in 2001, including increased community-based prevention and stigma reduction among others.
In October 2020, the National Suicide Hotline Designation Act came into effect.[245] This law states that there was to be a transition from a 10-digit hotline number to a universal 3-digit hotline number, which should be familiar and recognizable to everyone. On top of that, in May 2021, the Suicide Prevention Act passed the House, and was being considered by the Senate.[246] This Act would authorize a pilot program to intensify surveillance of self-harm and establish a grant program to provide more self-harm and suicide prevention services across the country.
On July 16, 2022, the US transitioned the National Suicide Hotline from the former 10-digit number into the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline, linking both the National Suicide Hotline, the Veterans Crisis Line, and a network of more than 200 state and local call centers run through SAMHSA, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.[247]
Historically, various states listed the act of suicide as a felony, but these policies were sparsely enforced. In the late 1960s, 18 U.S. states had no laws against suicide.[248] By the late 1980s, 30 of the 50 states had no laws against suicide or suicide attempts, but every state had laws declaring it to be a felony to aid, advise, or encourage another person to suicide.[249] By the early 1990s only two states still listed suicide as a crime, and these have since removed that classification.[citation needed] In some U.S. states, suicide is still considered an unwritten "common law crime," as stated in Blackstone's Commentaries. (So held the Virginia Supreme Court in 1992. Wackwitz v. Roy, 418 S.E.2d 861 (Va. 1992)). As a common law crime, suicide can bar recovery for the late suicidal person's family in a lawsuit unless the suicidal person can be proven to have been "of unsound mind." That is, the suicide must be proven to have been an involuntary act of the victim in order for the family to be awarded monetary damages by the court. This can occur when the family of the deceased sues the caregiver (perhaps a jail or hospital) for negligence in failing to provide appropriate care.[250] Some American legal scholars look at the issue as one of personal liberty. According to Nadine Strossen, former President of the ACLU, "The idea of government making determinations about how you end your life, forcing you...could be considered cruel and unusual punishment in certain circumstances, and Justice Stevens in a very interesting opinion in a right-to-die [case] raised the analogy."[251]
As of 2019 suicide is illegal in Maryland, and has been prosecuted at least ten times between 2009 and 2019.[252]
In New York State in 1917, while suicide was "a grave public wrong", an attempt to commit suicide was a felony, punishable by a maximum penalty of two years' imprisonment.[253][254]
A 2018 bill in Virginia to decriminalize suicide attempts failed to pass, and has not been reintroduced as of 2019.[252]
Physician-assisted suicide is legal in ten states (Oregon, Washington, Montana, Vermont, California, Colorado, Hawaii, New Jersey, Maine, and New Mexico) and Washington D.C. as of 2024.[255] For the terminally ill, it is legal in the state of Oregon under the Oregon Death with Dignity Act. In Washington state, it became legal in 2009, when a law modeled after the Oregon act, the Washington Death with Dignity Act was passed. A patient must be diagnosed as having less than six months to live, be of sound mind, make a request orally and in writing, have it approved by two different doctors, then wait 15 days and make the request again. A doctor may prescribe a lethal dose of a medication but may not administer it.[256]
The State of California has introduced several bills related to suicide over the last couple of years, most of which are related to youth. In 2016, Assembly Bill 2246 was passed, which required school districts to have a suicide prevention policy that addresses the needs of their highest-risk pupils in grades 7 to 12.[257] Since then, the Bill has been amended twice. First, in 2018, AB 2639 was passed, which required school districts to update their policy once every five years.[258] Then, in 2019, AB 1767 was passed. Because of this amendment, districts serving kindergarten to 6th grade will also have to have a suicide prevention policy.[259]
Lastly, also in 2019, the governor signed AB 984.[260] This Bill allows people to send their excess tax payments to a special Suicide Prevention Fund. This fund is supposed to award grants and help fund crisis centers. In California, medical facilities are empowered or required to commit anyone whom they believe to be suicidal for evaluation and treatment.[261]
The State of Utah has passed the most bills relating to suicide prevention as of 2021, with a total of 21 suicide-related bills.[262] A large number of these bills have been for school-based suicide prevention, including suicide prevention training for all school staff (HB 501), grant awards for programs in elementary schools to increase peer-to-peer suicide prevention (HB 346), and an expanded scope to specifically include the suicide risk of youth not accepted by family, especially LGBTQ youth (HB 393). Other bills have included topics such as increased attention for suicide prevention in substance use treatment (HB 346), bereavement services (HB 336), and suicide prevention programs related to firearm use (HB 17). Moreover, the Utah Division of Substance Abuse and Mental Health (DSAMH) has Zero Suicides as one of their policies, using this as a framework to guide their actions.[263]