Uruguay recently became the first country in Latin America to legalize euthanasia. Its General Assembly, the national legislature, approved legislation in October 2025 to allow euthanizing persons over 18 with a chronic, irreversible, and incurable disease that causes “unbearable suffering.” Over at least five years, Uruguay has been a target setting for introducing euthanasia into Latin America; the election of the left-wing Frente Amplio in late 2024 cleared the way for the euthanasia bill to advance. There is currently discussion to legalize euthanasia in other Latin American countries, including Mexico, Argentina, and Chile.

Miguel Pastorino is a professor at the Catholic University of Uruguay, holding a doctor of philosophy with a master’s degree in bioethics. He is founder of Prudencia Uruguay, a movement of professionals opposed to the legalization of euthanasia in Uruguay. Professor Pastorino discussed the new Uruguayan law in an interview with the Human Life Review.

HLR: Uruguay is the first country in Latin America to legalize euthanasia. Why did it happen, and happen there?

Prof. Pastorino: Contrary to what many think, Uruguay’s legalization of euthanasia had nothing to do with its advanced secularization. While it is true that Uruguay as a country has the fewest Catholics in Latin America (32 percent who identify as “Catholics,” practicing Catholics not exceeding 5 percent), the debate around euthanasia, as in other countries, arose for the same reasons, the same arguments repeated on both sides in the debate. What is unique about Uruguay is that the political parties that promoted it created a narrative that legalizing euthanasia was part of the “rights agenda,” an expansion of individual freedom and human rights. However, the law as adopted represents both a setback in legal protection for the most vulnerable and a loss of patients’ rights. There are a number of widespread myths in public opinion that predispose people to favor euthanasia.

HLR: What are the provisions of the new Uruguayan law? Under what conditions can one obtain euthanasia, and how is euthanasia carried out? When does the law go into effect?

Prof. Pastorino: The law was approved October 15 and has 180 days to go into effect after presidential promulgation, i.e., sometime after mid-March 2026. It allows any adult to request euthanasia who is in the terminal stage of an illness, has an incurable and irreversible disease, or who has a health condition (disability), and who in any of these cases presents with suffering that they consider unbearable and resulting in a serious deterioration of quality of life.

The procedure requires two consultations with general practitioners, i.e., no specialist. The law allows the patient to withdraw consent up to the last moment and establishes conscientious objection for any doctor who does not wish to perform it. But it does oblige the health system to offer euthanasia, because it considers it a health benefit, a patient’s right.

HLR: How will euthanasia take place?

Prof. Pastorino: The procedure is not assisted suicide, but rather an intravenous lethal injection. Without regulations yet, there is little precision. What is clear, according to the bill, is that the “physician or someone under his or her direction will [directly] cause the death of the patient.” It is an act against the patient.

HLR: What do you see as the main dangers or problems the new law poses?

Prof. Pastorino: Article 2 makes clear that euthanasia is not only for people in the terminal stages of a disease but for any person with a disability or chronic illness, the decisive criteria being quality of life and subjective suffering. A patient is evaluated by a general practitioner, followed by a second who confirms the previous opinion. Nothing more is required: no pre-evaluation committee, no psychiatrist, no psychologist, no social worker. In other words, there are no guarantees for the patient. Furthermore, by not first requiring palliative care, instead of providing relief if the person is suffering greatly, the solution unfairly offered is death.

The law establishes an evaluation committee after death, meaning the person will not be resuscitated if things were done wrong. It’s absurd. Topping it off, euthanasia will be classified as “natural death” so that life insurance can be collected. Isn’t euthanasia an artificially induced death? It is post-truth in a legislative text.

HLR: Most countries that legalized euthanasia initially adopted restrictions that, over time, were nullified either legally or in practice. Do you have concerns in this respect and, if so, what are they?

Prof. Pastorino: Article 2 of the bill is already quite broad, encompassing chronic illness and disability. I would not be surprised that in the future euthanasia will also include mental health. The current Minister of Public Health, who is a pediatrician, said at a conference when she was a member of parliament in 2021 that we should consider including children, taking into account their “progressive autonomy.”

HLR: Uruguay also has one of the more liberal abortion regimes in South America (legal up to 12-14 weeks of pregnancy). How do you evaluate the overall “culture of life” in Uruguay?

Prof. Pastorino: An abstract individualism dominates in politics, both on the left and right, one that ignores social causes and the problems of others. Everything is reduced to freedom as an absolute right: What matters is that one can decide as one wants, no matter what it is. Life has become a relative value, freedom an absolute value. What matters is deciding, no matter if it is contrary to the life or dignity of people.

HLR: What, if any, impact does the Church have on “life issues” in Uruguay?

Prof. Pastorino: Given Uruguay’s more than one-hundred-year-old culture of anti-clericalism, the Catholic Church here has very little influence on public debate. Catholicism is, in fact, a true minority. Only 32 percent call themselves Catholic, the lowest level on the continent, and only 5 percent are committed to practicing faith and morality as taught by the Church. In general, Uruguay’s liberal and secular tradition has meant that even Catholics disagree with doctrine on such serious issues as abortion and euthanasia. However, regarding euthanasia, there are atheists and agnostics who have joined the debate against euthanasia because they share humanistic values and are critical of the moral relativism and individualism dominant in our societies. Many Catholics have participated in the public debate, but without alluding to their identity, because it is counterproductive in communication. If the Church in Uruguay opposes an issue, the majority generally supports the issue by default. The best strategy that let the debate drag on for five years was to avoid having the Church’s voice as a central figure at the beginning, because in Uruguay that would have accelerated the pro-euthanasia stance. It’s very difficult to understand the negative and pejorative view of the Church in Uruguay outside of our context. The Church has never been as strong at any point in its history as it has been in other Latin American countries.

HLR: Were there any foreign influences or actors pushing for the euthanasia law?

Prof. Pastorino: I don’t know. It’s sobering how quickly they needed to vote on the bill this year without listening to experts who warned about improving the law. There was a sheer blindness and haste to pass it without dialogue, without listening. Although we prolonged the discussion for five years, the text remained unchanged.

HLR: What are the reasons for the growing trend in some countries to legalize euthanasia?

Prof. Pastorino: I think there is a growing cultural tendency towards hedonism and avoidance of any type of suffering, because there are no narratives that give meaning to life and suffering. Being immersed in consumerism and a culture of well-being, we do not want to see old age, dependency, or vulnerability as part of life. The sooner they disappear from our sight, the better. Nor do we want to care for others either: There is no time nor appreciation for care as something humanizing. Life expectancy is increasing, and people spend many years in a state of dependency and needing care. It is cheaper and less tiring to convince them that they are a burden and to leave sooner. People have also normalized euthanasia because they have stopped valuing their own lives if they are not productive. The only way to reverse these practices is if we recover what Christianity bequeathed to Western culture: compassion.

HLR: What is the outlook for euthanasia legislation in Latin America?

Prof. Pastorino: Projects are underway in Argentina and Chile.

HLR: Thank you, Professor Pastorino.