Situación actual de la eutanasia y el suicidio asistido en los países occidentales
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
espanolObjetivo principal: Clarificar el uso del termino “eutanasia”, conocer los criterios de aplicacion de los modelos legales de muerte asistida en los paises occidentales, asi como analizar su situacion normativa en Espana. Metodologia: Revision bibliografica distintas bases de datos juridicas y de ciencias de la salud. Resultados principales: La eutanasia y el suicidio asistido son legales en: Holanda, Belgica, Luxemburgo y Canada. El suicidio asistido esta despenalizado en Suiza y en siete estados de Estados Unidos. En Colombia y el estado australiano de Victoria la eutanasia esta despenalizada. En Espana ambas practicas son delito. Conclusion principal: En los paises donde la muerte asistida esta despenalizada su practica exige cumplir con una serie de requisitos y procedimientos legales. EnglishObjective: To clarify the use of the term euthanasia, to know the criteria of application of the legal models of assisted death in the Western countries, as well as to analyze the normative situation in Spain. Methods: A bibliographic review is carried out in different legal databases and health sciences. Results: Euthanasia and assisted suicide are legal in: Holland, Belgium, Luxembourg and Canada. In Switzerland and in seven states of the United States assisted suicide is decriminalized. In Colombia and the Australian state of Victoria, euthanasia is decriminalized. In Spain, both practices are crimes. Conclusions: In countries where assisted death is decriminalized, its practice requires compliance with a series of legal requirements and procedures.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it