Physician-Assisted Suicide

DjaugheOld · October 5th, 2005, 09:34 AM

Should the federal government be allowed to set standards (i.e. trump states rights) when it comes to physician-assisted suicide?

The Supreme Court is reviewing the Oregon case to determine whether the federal government has the power to block doctors from helping terminally ill patients end their lives.

Quote:

Supreme Court hears Oregon's suicide law challenge
Seattle Times, United States
... Whatever the outcome of those efforts, one researcher says Oregon's assisted suicide debate has had the effect of raising public awareness about the need to ...

DjaugheOld · October 5th, 2005, 09:36 AM

I apologize...the poll question got cropped.

This is the full question:

Quote:

Should the federal government be allowed to set standards (i.e. trump states rights) when it comes to physician-assisted suicide?

Kolo · October 5th, 2005, 09:43 AM

I voted no, for Constitutional reasons--but I think the more interesting question is under what circumstances (if any) should physician assisted suicide be legal. The right to privacy proponents have good S.Ct. case law supporting the notion.

DjaugheOld · October 5th, 2005, 09:53 AM

I voted 'no' as well.

Rivercard · October 5th, 2005, 09:59 AM

I find it unacceptible that in Oregon you would be free to die in peace, but in Montana you would be forced to endure.

Chaz · October 5th, 2005, 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rivercard

I find it unacceptible that in Oregon you would be free to die in peace, but in Montana you would be forced to endure.

That is great until the Feds decide to make everyone endure.

Right now, If you want to die from assisted suicide move to Oregon.

If they have success with it and it is more accepted then I think Montana would follow suit.

50 democracy expriments. The competition of ideas and innovations is a better way than one centrally planned idea from 2000 miles away.

Rivercard · October 5th, 2005, 10:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SirChaz

That is great until the Feds decide to make everyone endure.

That's exactly what they are trying to do with medical marijuana.

Chaz · October 5th, 2005, 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rivercard

That's exactly what they are trying to do with medical marijuana.

Right, they are wrong there too.

Let the States decide.

Unless the States are violating someone basic human rights the Feds should just stay out of it and stick to what they are authorized by the constitution to do.

DKCards · October 5th, 2005, 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rivercard

I find it unacceptible that in Oregon you would be free to die in peace, but in Montana you would be forced to endure.

Or……

I find it unacceptible that you can kill someone in Oregon with no penalty under the law.

Rivercard · October 5th, 2005, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SirChaz

Unless the States are violating someone basic human rights the Feds should just stay out of it and stick to what they are authorized by the constitution to do.

Isn't it odd that deciding to end your own life on your own terms is not a basic human right? After all, it's your life.

Chaz · October 5th, 2005, 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rivercard

Isn't it odd that deciding to end your own life on your own terms is not a basic human right? After all, it's your life.

Yes, but I can see how it could be abused and someone could just kill someone off because they were inconvient or unwanted which I think is what the opponents fear. That and concers about the overall de-valuing of human life.

A close friend of my dad's died of cancer (in Oregon). He had fought so long and there came a point where he was just ready to die. He should be able to do that as quickly and painlessly as possible.

Neo · October 5th, 2005, 10:46 AM

My biggest concern is will my HMO cover this??

If they do, I am sure that I'll have to go see my regular doctor first, fill out a bunch of paperwork, get a referral to a specialist, and then I'll have to wait months for an appointment.
To top it all off, unless I opt for the generic equivilant of the lethal injection, I'll have to pay $50 for the poison.
It is more hassle than it is worth.

Derm · October 5th, 2005, 10:47 AM

I think one of the first question to be asked is: "is assisted suicide a right to be allowed by the state".

Derm · October 5th, 2005, 10:55 AM

Here's another Oregon health related case from the Smoking Gun:

Physician assisted ___________ (fill-in your own malady)

Quote:

Lawsuit: Oregon doc prescribed sex for woman's back pain problem

OCTOBER 5--An Oregon woman claims that her former doctor prescribed sex with him as a treatment for lower back pain, according to a new lawsuit. In a Circuit Court complaint, an excerpt of which you'll find below, Susan Beach alleges that Randall Smith, an osteopathic physician, told her that there was "a medical need to manipulate a nerve in her vagina to help alleviate her lower back pain." These treatments began in June 2003 and ended seven months later after Beach mentioned the unorthodox care to her dentist, who was alarmed by Smith's behavior. Beach is seeking $4 million in damages from Smith and the medical clinic where he worked. Smith, who has claimed the patient sex was consensual, was stripped of his medical license in April for submitting phony reimbursement claims to the Oregon Health Plan. That criminal scheme cost Smith, pictured in the above mug shot, 60 days in jail.

Chaz · October 5th, 2005, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derm

I think one of the first question to be asked is: "is assisted suicide a right to be allowed by the state".

I am not sure I understand the question. If it is the state's to give or take away then it is not really recognized as a right anyway.

I think the question here is what authority does the federal government have to overrule the laws of the state in this case.