High Court Unveils 3 Major Decisions: Statutes Barring Assisted Suicide Upheld by All 9

By Murray, Frank J. | The Washington Times (Washington, DC), June 27, 1997 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

High Court Unveils 3 Major Decisions: Statutes Barring Assisted Suicide Upheld by All 9

Murray, Frank J., The Washington Times (Washington, DC)

A unanimous Supreme Court declared yesterday that states may outlaw assisted suicide to avoid what Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist called "a Netherlands-style slide to voluntary and perhaps involuntary euthanasia."

The ruling that states are not constitutionally obliged to permit doctor-assisted suicide apparently leaves them free to legalize the practice. Several justices noted doctors are free to relieve pain even if death is an unintended side-effect.

"Throughout the nation Americans are engaged in earnest and profound debate about the morality, legality and practicality of physician-assisted suicide. Our holding permits this debate to continue, as it should in a democratic society," wrote Justice Rehnquist, whose wife, Natalie, died in 1991 from ovarian cancer.

To the relief of physicians who oppose helping suicides, the court drew sharp distinctions between killing a patient and disconnecting life support or increasing dosages of painkillers to relieve suffering.

"The physician's purpose and intent is, or may be, only to ease his patient's pain. A doctor who assists a suicide, however, must, necessarily and indubitably, intend primarily that the patient be made dead," the chief justice said.

The ruling found New York and Washington state justified in following a 700-year tradition of Anglo-American law to disapprove of suicide and punish as criminals those who help the final act.

It reversed decisions by two appeals courts overturning the state laws but left undecided the validity of Oregon voters' choice to legalize physician-assisted suicide subject to Supreme Court review in the fall.

"The asserted right to assistance in committing suicide is not a fundamental right that is protected by the due process clause," the chief justice told a crowded courtroom in announcing the high court's first ruling on a social movement to facilitate death for terminally ill patients.

By citing in such blunt terms the Dutch practice that permits frequent exceptions to a national law, the chief justice touched a fear of some assisted-suicide opponents - that old or infirm people will be killed without consent.

All nine justices agreed on the bottom-line judgment in both cases. But John Paul Stevens, Sandra Day O'Connor, David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer expressed themselves in separate concurring opinions. In all, the two cases inspired 12 written opinions.

Justice O'Connor also joined Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony M. Kennedy and Clarence Thomas in the court's opinion written by the chief justice.

Justice O'Connor agreed there is no general right to commit suicide and worried about how voluntary the decision might be. But she suggested that mentally competent patients who are suffering may have a constitutional interest "in controlling the circumstances of his or her imminent death."

"Death will be different for each of us. For many the last days will be spent in physical pain and perhaps the despair that accompanies physical deterioration and a loss of control of basic bodily and mental functions," she wrote.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Cite this article

Cited article

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

High Court Unveils 3 Major Decisions: Statutes Barring Assisted Suicide Upheld by All 9


Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?