Abstract
Background/Objectives: The extension of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide to individuals with mental disorders presents a profound ethical, clinical, and legal challenge. While increasingly accepted in some jurisdictions, their application in psychiatric contexts-particularly in cases of depression-raises concerns about diagnostic precision, therapeutic adequacy, and the validity of informed consent. This study examines two controversial Belgian cases to explore the complexities of euthanasia for psychological suffering. Methods: A qualitative case analysis was conducted through a qualitative analysis of publicly available media sources. The cases were examined through clinical, psychoanalytic, and medico-legal lenses to assess diagnostic clarity, treatment history, and ethical considerations. No access to official medical records was available. Case Presentation: The first case involved a young woman whose depressive symptoms were reportedly linked to trauma from a terrorist attack. The second concerned a middle-aged woman convicted of infanticide and later diagnosed with Major Depression. Discussion: In both cases, euthanasia was granted on the grounds of "irreversible psychological suffering." However, the absence of detailed clinical documentation, potential unresolved trauma, and lack of psychodynamic assessment raised doubts about the robustness of the evaluations and the validity of informed consent. Conclusions: These findings highlight the need for a more rigorous, multidisciplinary, and ethically grounded approach to psychiatric euthanasia. This study underscores the importance of precise diagnostic criteria, comprehensive treatment histories, and deeper exploration of unconscious and existential motivations. Safeguarding clinical integrity and ethical standards is essential in end-of-life decisions involving mental illness.