<p>The Czech debate on euthanasia illustrates with particular clarity how bioethical questions are inseparably intertwined with law, politics, and public discourse. Over the past decade, the issue has generated an exceptional number of monographs, creating a dense intellectual framework for reflection on dignity, autonomy, and end-of-life decision-making. Despite sustained scholarly engagement and repeated legislative initiatives, all proposals to legalize euthanasia have been rejected. The Constitutional Court has clarified that, while personal autonomy deserves respect, no constitutional right to euthanasia exists under Czech law; dignity is located primarily in the guarantee of care, and responsibility for any potential legal change lies with Parliament. Alongside legal and philosophical debates, public discussion has also been shaped by interventions from political actors. Public statements by President Petr Pavel supporting the possibility of a “dignified departure” attracted media attention and prompted reflection on how dignity is articulated in political language. Philosophical responses—most notably Tereza Matějčková’s critique of equating dignity with not becoming a burden—highlight the risk that such rhetoric may exert subtle pressure on vulnerable individuals. Drawing on international experience from jurisdictions where assisted dying has been legalized, this article shows that palliative care and assisted dying have typically developed in parallel rather than in opposition. However, this empirical coexistence does not resolve normative tensions surrounding dignity, autonomy, and vulnerability. The Czech case thus demonstrates that bioethics, particularly in its proximity to law and institutional decision-making, is inherently political and calls for sustained ethical reflection on vulnerability and palliative care.</p>