U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Oregon's Right-to-Die Law

A step toward securing death with dignity or a slippery slope toward accepting euthanasia?

BY: Fran Moreland Johns

Since its enactment in 1997, Oregon's right-to-die law has galvanized religious leaders and organizations on both sides of the issue of physician-assisted dying. The only state statute of its kind in the nation, the Oregon Death with Dignity Act first drew fire from the Bush administration in 2001 when then-Attorney-General John Ashcroft threatened to prosecute doctors who administered lethal doses of prescription medications to terminally ill patients seeking to end their lives.

The legal challenge to Ashcroft's 2001 directive culminated in the U.S. Supreme Court's January 17, 2006, decision upholding the Oregon law in the case now known as Gonzales v. Oregon. Proponents of the Oregon Death With Dignity Act argued that mentally competent, terminally ill adults have the right to request their physician's aid in hastening their dying. Opponents maintained such action violates religious teachings on the sanctity of life and leads to a "slippery slope" toward euthanasia. Also at issue has been the question of states' rights versus federal powers. Oregon voters twice approved their law; opponents said it violated federal anti-drug statutes.

Although the legal battle over the law has hinged on physicians' right to prescribe life-ending drugs which fall within the federal Controlled Substances Act (CSA), the underlying fight has been between what one side sees as the dying individual's right to a humane and compassionate death and the other as interference with God's plan.

Responding to the Supreme Court's ruling, attorney Nico van Aelstyn said that the decision "indirectly upholds the values most Americans cherish: liberty, dignity, and privacy at the end of life.

"We are very pleased," Van Aelstyn says, "with the Supreme Court's affirmation of the Ninth Circuit Court decision upholding the injunction against former Attorney-General Ashcroft's 2001 directive to physicians to refrain from assisting terminally ill patients under the Oregon law. This is consistent with decisions in lower courts, and with any reasonable reading of the Controlled Substances Act."

Compassion & Choices Co-CEO and President Barbara Coombs Lee said, "We are delighted with the Supreme Court's decision, a watershed decision for freedom and democracy in the U.S. It reaffirms the liberty, dignity, and privacy Americans cherish." Lee says Compassion & Choices will "aggressively pursue similar legislation throughout the nation."

Will the Oregon law lead to forced euthanasia?
Read more on page 2 >>


_Related Features

Continued on page 2: »

Related Topics:

News

Comments

Add Comment »

To comment on this content you must be a registered user:

Sign-Up or Log-In

About Beliefnet

Our mission is to help people like you find, and walk, a spiritual path that will bring comfort, hope, clarity, strength, and happiness. More about Beliefnet.

Legal

Copyright © Beliefnet, Inc. and/or its licensors. All rights reserved. Use of this site is subject to Terms of Service and to our Privacy Policy. Constructed by Beliefnet.

Advertisement

DiggDeliciousNewsvineRedditStumbleTechnoratiFacebook
Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.