|
E-mail this page to a friend!
Right to Die Case Heard by U.S. Supreme Court
By Jim Malone
Washington Bureau, Voice of America
Oct. 6, 2005 - The Supreme Court heard oral
arguments Wednesday in a case involving the emotionally wrenching issue
of doctor-assisted suicide for terminally ill patients.
At issue is a law in the western state of Oregon,
the only state that allows terminally ill people to ask their doctors to
prescribe a lethal dose of drugs.
Since 1997 when Oregon's Death With Dignity Act
took effect, 208 people have requested medical help to end their lives.
Charlene Andrews may add her name to that list one
day. She is dying from cancer and says she values the option of choosing
when to end her life.
| |
Related Stories |
|
| |
Supreme Court Vote
Could Be Close on Challenge to Death with Dignity Law
Noted professor, former court clerk, looks at the
issues
Oct. 3, 2005 - The decision by the Supreme Court on
the case involving physician-assisted suicide could end up being a close
one, says Duke University law and political science professor Neil
Siegel, a former Supreme Court clerk and advisor on court issues.
Read more...
Death with
Dignity Case to be First Major Case for Chief Justice Roberts
U.S. Supreme Court to Hear Physician Assisted Dying
Case on October 5th
Oct. 2, 2005 As the U.S. Supreme Court opens its
new session this week; one of the cases many senior citizens will watch
closely will be heard on Wednesday, when Oregon's landmark Death with
Dignity Law takes center stage. The question is about the federal
governments power over a states right to determine medical practices.
Read more...
|
|
"I know when all of my treatment options have been
exhausted. Having the choice gives me comfort. It is just knowing that
there is an option, knowing there is a choice," she said.
The case before the Supreme Court is likely to
hinge on the more narrow legal question of whether the power to regulate
physician-assisted suicide rests with the federal government or the
individual states.
In 2001, then Attorney General John Ashcroft
decided that the use of lethal drugs to help people in Oregon end their
lives was a violation of federal drug laws. The Bush administration also
argues that assisted suicide is incompatible with a doctor's role as a
healer.
State officials in Oregon argue that the federal
government has overstepped its authority.
Mary Williams was among those arguing on behalf of
the state of Oregon before the Supreme Court.
"Nowhere did Congress say that they wanted to make
that kind of transformation of power from the states regulating medical
practice to the U.S. Attorney General regulating medical practice," said
Ms. Williams.
The assisted suicide law first won public approval
in Oregon in 1994 by a narrow 51 percent majority. Sixty percent of
voters rejected an attempt to repeal the law three years later.
A number of right to life groups support the Bush
administration's effort to stop doctor-assisted suicides in Oregon.
The issue often generates fierce debate on
television and radio call-in programs.
"First and foremost, I do not think we have a
constitutional right to murder ourselves. I have yet to find it anywhere
in the Bill of Rights," said a listener.
Diane Coleman is with a group that opposes the
Oregon law called Not Dead Yet. She says the states should be not in the
business of encouraging sick people to end their lives.
"And instead of discouraging you and telling you
how valuable your life is, we are going to agree with you and make sure
you do not mess it up. We are going to give you the means to do it," she
added. "That is a very dangerous message to people who have severe
impairments, whether they are terminal or not."
Supporters of the Oregon law counter that it should
be up to those who are terminally ill to decide when to ask for help to
end their lives.
"A fraction of dying patients, even with excellent
pain and symptom management, face a dying process that is so prolonged
and marked by such extreme deterioration and suffering that for them
having the choice for a peaceful and humane death on their own time, on
their own terms, is the least worst alternative," added Kathryn Tucker,
who is with a national group called Compassion and Choices.
In 1997, the Supreme Court found that terminally
ill people do not have a constitutional right to physician-assisted
suicide. But the court also gave states the option to experiment with
the issue.
The case is considered the first major issue to
come before the high court under the leadership of new Chief Justice
John Roberts, who replaced the late William Rehnquist.
The Supreme Court is expected to issue a ruling in
this latest assisted suicide case sometime in the next few months.
For
more from the Voice of America - click here.
Click to
More Senior News on the Front Page
Copyright:
SeniorJournal.com |
