Vacco v. Quill - A Two-edged Sword

Advances in medicine have extended human life expectancy dramatically in the 1980s and 1990s. While this was generally viewed as a desirable development, medical science prolonged the lives of terminally ill people, even in cases where their quality of life was poor. As more people with terminal illness lived longer, many who suffered great pain or debilitation expressed a desire to end their suffering through death. Many individuals have sympathized with this outlook, including numerous members of the medical profession. As such, the possibility and reality of physician-assisted suicide has become a regular part of popular debate and a focus of legislative activities.

In the early 1990s, New York State law forbade physicians from assisting terminally ill patients wishing to end their lives. Physicians were allowed, however, to deny life-prolonging treatment to those terminally ill patients who did not wish to receive it. Perceiving a logical incongruity in these statutes three physicians, Timothy E. Quill, Samuel C. Klagsbrun, and Howard A. Grosman brought suit against the New York State Attorney General in U.S. District Court to invalidate the state's ban on assisted suicide.