Oregon's Assisted-Suicide Law to Get High Court Airing ; Supreme Court Agrees to Review Bush Administration's Bid to Block the Nation's Only Doctor-Assisted Suicide Law
Brad Knickerbocker writer of The Christian Science Monitor, The Christian Science Monitor
The United States Supreme Court has agreed to take up physician- assisted suicide, potentially one of the most profound political and social issues today. The case involves Oregon's law allowing certain individuals to take their own lives with the help of a doctor. The outcome could determine whether such laws are enacted in other parts of the country.
The issue is a complicated one, as a series of legislative debates, ballot measures, and court cases around the country in recent years have shown. It involves medical ethics, federal drug law, questions of privacy, and the balance of legal and political power between states and the federal government.
Oregon's "Death with Dignity Act" became law in 1997 after voters twice had approved it at the polls by wide margins. It applies only to mentally competent adults who declare their intentions in writing, are diagnosed as terminally ill, and take the prescribed drug themselves orally after a waiting period. Oregon's law specifically prohibits "lethal injection, mercy killing, or active euthanasia."
Critics had predicted that vulnerable patients could be pressured by doctors or family members to end their lives, and also that out- of-staters might rush to Oregon to take advantage of its unique law. Apparently, neither has happened. On average, fewer than 25 people a year chose to end their lives under the law.
The Bush administration and key members of Congress argue that prescribing a lethal drug for purposes of suicide violates the federal Controlled Substances Act, and that this trumps state law and the long-held position that medical practices are to be regulated by the states.
A federal judge and then the Ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals rejected that position. To do so, the appeals court ruled, "interferes with the democratic debate about physician-assisted suicide."
In earlier cases, the US Supreme Court ruled that there is no constitutional right to assisted suicide. But the high court also did not declare the practice to be illegal. As Associate Justice Sandra Day O'Connor wrote: "There is no reason to think the democratic process will not strike the proper balance. …