Where Can I Watch The Bait Bus?

living wills living wills
The Senate approved the bill with Calabrò with 150 votes, 123 against and 3 abstentions, waiting to be explored dalla Camera dei Deputati, scandisce gli ultimi atti di una tragedia “ comica” all’italiana che ripercorre la vicenda di Eluana Englaro sorretta dal motto “Mai più casi Eluana”.

Appare evidente come tale circolo vizioso rimarchi una linea governativa che pone in essere una soluzione al problema non affatto laica, ma geneticamente etica, tale da smentire l’affinità dello stesso ddl Calabrò al clima costituzionale.

La domanda da porsi non è : “Cos’è un testamento biologico?”, ma “Qual è la matrice costituente di un testamento biologico?”
Il testamento organic feeds on the primordial conception of the meaning of the word "will" and "freedom" and finds its strength in generating and non-derogable "right to life, Right to Health and Human Personality."
As for the "primordial meaning" of the Old Testament word, faithful to a simple dictionary of the Italian language reads: "An act by which someone has withdrawn all or part of its assets for the time after his death (holograph, public ) - a set of spiritual ideas, principles and feelings. " Established this essential element of a verse from the Old Testament is revoked e dall’altro la finalità di rispettare la “ voluntas testantis” ovvero le volontà dei testamentari.
In tale ottica, al di là della sfera del diritto , l’emendamento dell’Udc (art 4 ) che prevede la libertà dei medici di non rispettare le ultime volontà, non trova nessuna giustificazione nemmeno davanti alla possibilità di rendere il biotestamento meno “rigido”, poiché viene a mancare il presupposto della “ voluntas testantis ”!

Superata tale prima riflessione, si ricade nel Diritto alla Vita,anzitempo problema assai delicato era (ancora non risolto ) di stabilire il momento when you purchase the right to life to which offset the hypothesis of euthanasia or death inflicted by the patient's consent for reasons of mercy to escape the suffering of incurable disease course.
According to the law, the practice of euthanasia is forbidden, but is a legitimate statement of the person having a legal capacity to act natural and refuse aggressive medical treatment so that no medical intervention is not only legitimate, but needed.
In addition, the presence of a fatal disease carries in most cases the patient to no longer be able to understand and will, that can no longer deny the fury treatment that is not reflected only in the administration of medical treatment, but in artificial feeding, this effect is not due to natural and physical needs, which also decipher a vital fury and not " life support" as Calabrò signed by Bill which provides for "the prohibition to stop artificial nutrition and hydration ! Yet
being " artificial" nutrition and hydration to exclude the first of life support, but requires that the vegetative state is nothing more than "forcing " aggressive physical condition of the patient, preventing agency to develop the final effects of a fatal disease, not respecting the closing date of the Right to Life.
Once such a deduction should come into play in the living will lay line (denied by Calabrò dll) aimed at making effective and binding upon the statements made "prior " by the patient regarding the possibility of being subjected to medical treatment aimed at prolong survival.

for consequential logic and secondly, the living will is authentic right to health and Article 3, paragraph 1 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of European Union "under which" Everyone is entitled to their physical and mental integrity. " (Physical limitations, which in theory could be protected by a vegetative state and all that entails including bed sores).
The right to health, and also the living will should be a matter for the "principle of self " (which does not happen with the Calabrò dll) that is in accordance with Article 32 of the Constitution: " Nobody can be forced to a specific medical treatment unless required by law . Certainly
treatment health may be required by law not to "avoid further cases Eluana " what the benefit of the individual subject, but only to preserve the " The best interests of public health protection "
Outside exceptional cases would have remained in force on the "principle of self " that in case of fatal diseases, not a single statement would be protected in advance, if made by a living will, so as to exclude exceptions to the physician.

Finally everything is framed by the personal rights, the same inalienable rights that the Republic recognizes and guarantees the man as an individual and in the social.
This strengthens the idea of \u200b\u200bnatural law, that man is the bearer of rights "inherent " and calls for action not constitutive of these rights by ordering, but riconoscitivo, which as such (for example the Right to Health , Right to Life) are "inviolable " by the State, in exercise of powers legislative, executive and judicial
.. In other words, the Constitution designed to create an intangible limit, which translates into Libertà nell’ottica del diritto , nei confronti dello Stato,al fine di evitare gli abusi e l’arbitrio dei pubblici poteri.

Intromissione indebita che oggi si palesa nel dll Calabrò mediante l’emendamento del’Udc e il divieto allo stop della alimentazione e idratazione artificiale, che viola i diritti innati dell’uomo,quale quello alla Salute, nella teoria dei limiti della Vita, e lo stesso concetto di Libertà nella sfera del diritto, sottolineando che i diritti inviolabili dell’uomo non sono solo quelli a cui fa riferimento l’art 2 della Cost e da altre norme della stessa, ma anche quelli che in un dato momento storico la coscienza sociale ,ritiene essenziali per la tutela della persona.
Solo in tal senso si può avviare un iter legislativo , che porti ad un testamento biologico in versione laica, volto a tutelare la libertà dell’individuo nella scelta di fare ciò che ritiene opportuno del proprio corpo e vita,sdoganando la sua genesi dall’etica,dalla morale e dal cattolicesimo.

Maria.