2008 Woodie Awards
Point-counterpoint: Physician-assisted suicide
The right to die with dignity
Ben Pauli
Issue date: 10/14/05 Section: Opinions & Editorials
- Page 1 of 1
The Supreme Court's decision to hear a case involving the legality of an Oregon law allowing physician-assisted suicide in extreme cases has caused the debate over the right to control one's death to resurface.
The Oregon "Death With Dignity" law has a number of caveats that prevent patients from choosing assisted suicide on a whim or because of depression. According to the law, patients must be terminally ill with less than six months to live, must make two verbal and one written request for assisted suicide with a 15-day interval between requests, must have two doctors agree that their decision is not based on depression, coercion, or a whim, and must have been informed of other medical options for the end of life. Such requirements have limited the number of candidates for physician assisted suicide and have resulted in less than 50 assisted suicides per year in Oregon.
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales is challenging the law, stating that it violates the Controlled Substances Act. Unfortunately, this case is not truly about whether a federal law is violated. This lawsuit is a test case for the court's decision about who controls one's life - and death. The Christian right argues that life must be preserved no matter what the cost, even if that means forcing the terminally ill to endure incredible suffering despite their inevitable death and even their own wishes. Terminally ill patients have the right to decide when and how they die. Why should we allow someone else's beliefs to be pushed upon us so that they decide the circumstances of our death, not us? Choosing to die is our own decision - no one else's. Dying with dignity means allowing patients to make the last decision of their life for themselves - the choice to die.
The Oregon "Death With Dignity" law has a number of caveats that prevent patients from choosing assisted suicide on a whim or because of depression. According to the law, patients must be terminally ill with less than six months to live, must make two verbal and one written request for assisted suicide with a 15-day interval between requests, must have two doctors agree that their decision is not based on depression, coercion, or a whim, and must have been informed of other medical options for the end of life. Such requirements have limited the number of candidates for physician assisted suicide and have resulted in less than 50 assisted suicides per year in Oregon.
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales is challenging the law, stating that it violates the Controlled Substances Act. Unfortunately, this case is not truly about whether a federal law is violated. This lawsuit is a test case for the court's decision about who controls one's life - and death. The Christian right argues that life must be preserved no matter what the cost, even if that means forcing the terminally ill to endure incredible suffering despite their inevitable death and even their own wishes. Terminally ill patients have the right to decide when and how they die. Why should we allow someone else's beliefs to be pushed upon us so that they decide the circumstances of our death, not us? Choosing to die is our own decision - no one else's. Dying with dignity means allowing patients to make the last decision of their life for themselves - the choice to die.