|
Front Page
Sections |
Dying with dignityFederal court strikes ban on assisted suicideThe red-hot issue of physician-assisted suicide splashed across news pages and television sets once again last week when a federal appeals court in Manhattan struck down a New York state law that banned such suicides. The decision comes on the heels of another appeals court decision in California last month that struck down a similar law in Washington state. As more and more physician-assisted suicide laws come under judicial scrutiny, the Supreme Court should finally agree to decide on the issue -- and legalize such procedures in every state.The New York case began a few years ago, when three physicians and their patients sued the state for the right to die. All three plaintiffs had terminal illnesses. In 1994, a federal district judge would not grant the patients' and their doctors' request, but the plaintiffs continued to push. Then, last week, in a decision of broad implications, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan voted to overturn the federal district court's decision, thereby legalizing assisted suicide in New York. The three patients since have died; the physicians and their lawyers deserve commendation for continuing the legal fight. In their decision, the judges posed several rhetorical questions that touched upon the key issues at the center of the assisted suicide debate. They wrote, "What interest can the state probably have in requiring the prolongation of a life that is all but ended? ... And what business is it of the state to require the continuation of agony when the result is imminent and inevitable?" The state should have no say in terminally ill individuals' decision to end their lives. The state has no broad interest at stake, nor is assisted suicide a threat to its sovereignty. Instead, the government should stay out of these personal decisions. The state, with laws that ban assisted suicide, cause more suffering and pain for patients in the long run. Moreover, assisted suicide allows people to die with dignity. Terminally ill people can escape from an imminently dreadful and painful life to die in peace. Proponents of the ban argue that allowing assisted suicide may cause excessive and unneeded deaths. Another concern they hold is that legalizing assisted suicide will open a Pandora's box and anyone looking to commit suicide will have the chance to do it peacefully -- an ironic fear, since the right to die is individual. However, choosing to end one's life is a major decision, not one reached lightly. Patients who seek assistance in their suicides usually have suffered for a long time with a devastating illness. Furthermore, most -- if not all -- doctors will not want to aid a suicide unless the patient is beyond hope of recovering; hence, doctors will not abuse the law. Legalizing the action will not necessarily increase the amount of procedures done -- instead, it will make them legal. The issue of doctor-assisted suicide will not go away. In Michigan, for example, Oakland County prosecutors are currently embattled in yet another trial to convict Dr. Jack Kevorkian for assisting suicides. Public opinion overwhelmingly supports legalizing assisted suicide -- legislators should listen to the voters who send them to power. Ultimately, the Supreme Court will have to decide on this issue, and the Court should consider taking up the issue within the next year. In the meantime, states should give terminally ill patients the liberty to choose whether to end their own lives.
|