Other Free Encyclopedias :: Law Library - American Law and Legal Information :: Free Legal Encyclopedia - Earnest Money to George Washington Ellis :: Euthanasia - Passive Euthanasia, Active Euthanasia, Physician-assisted Suicide, Euthanasia Considerations, Euthanasia And Physician-assisted Suicide - Involuntary Euthanasia
 

Euthanasia - Oregon's Euthanasia Law

Oregon's Euthanasia Law

In 1994, voters in the state of Oregon approved a ballot measure that would have legalized euthanasia under limited conditions. Under the Death With Dignity law, a person who sought physician-assisted suicide would have to meet certain criteria:

Under the proposed law, a person who met all requirements could receive a prescription of a barbiturate that would be sufficient to cause death. Physicians would be prohibited from inducing death by injection or carbon monoxide.

The NATIONAL RIGHT TO LIFE COMMITTEE, supported by the Roman Catholic Church, obtained a court INJUNCTION to delay implementation of the measure. The law stalled in the appeals process. In the meantime, the measure was not enacted. In 1997, there was a second public REFERENDUM, and the law was enacted. Within 24 hours of the announcement of the results, state officials had forms for physicians to record instances of assisted suicide. These were later distributed to physicians in the state. The form is entitled "Request for Medication to End My Life in a Humane and Dignified Manner."

Immediately after the law was affirmed, Thomas Constantine, the administrator of the federal DRUG ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATION (DEA), wrote a policy statement which said that prescribing drugs to help terminally ill patients kill themselves would be a violation of the Controlled Substances Act. Nevertheless, on March 26, 1998, a woman in her mid-eighties died from a lethal dose of barbiturates, which had been prescribed by her doctor under the Oregon law. She was the first person to publicly use the law to commit suicide. She had been fighting breast cancer for 20 years and recently had been told by her doctor that she had less than two months to live. She had been experiencing increased difficulty breathing. She made a tape recording in which she stated, "I'm looking forward to it. I will be relieved of all the stress I have." Her personal doctor would not help her end her life, so she turned to an advocacy group, Compassion in Dying. That group located a doctor to assist her. She fell into a deep sleep about five minutes after taking the lethal dose of pills, and she died peacefully about 25 minutes later. Attorney General JANET RENO officially reversed Constantine's ruling a few weeks later, stating that doctors who use the law to prescribe lethal drugs to terminally ill patients will not be prosecuted and that drug laws were intended to block illegal trafficking in drugs, not to cover situations like the Oregon suicide law.

Despite significant controversy, by the end of 1998, one prediction of the anti-choice forces had not materialized: there was no rush of people to Oregon to seek an easy end to life. While it was predicted that many would take advantage of the law, of the 23 terminally ill individuals who applied to end their own lives in 1998, 15 committed suicide, usually within a day of receiving the prescription. Six died from their illnesses without using the medication. Two remained alive at the end of 1998. From 1998 to 2002, 129 people have opted for physician assisted suicide.

In early 2001, Oregon state senator Ron Wyden wrote Attorney General JOHN ASHCROFT asking that the GEORGE W. BUSH administration not mount an attack on the state law permitting assistance in suicide. Ashcroft wrote a letter to Asa Hutchinson, chief of the Drug Enforcement Administration. He declared that assisting a terminally ill patient to commit suicide is not a "legitimate medical purpose" for federally controlled drugs. He said that physicians who use drugs to help patients die face suspension or revocation of their licenses to prescribe federally controlled drugs. This was contrary to the position taken by Janet Reno, his predecessor. The attorney general of Oregon, Hardy Myers, quickly initiated a lawsuit to have the Ashcroft's directive declared unconstitutional. The federal district court in Oregon issued a temporary injunction, which prevents the federal government from enforcing Ashcroft's interpretation of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). The state of Oregon requested that the court block the federal DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE from taking legal action against Oregon doctors who prescribe medication to help their patients commit suicide. A federal judge ruled in favor of the state law in 2002, and the Department of Justice appealed the decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Both sides have stated that they will appeal the decision if they lose.

Euthanasia - Other States [next] [back] Euthanasia - Historical Considerations

User Comments Add a comment…

5 months ago

It's great to see reason and rationality prevailing. We have no problem with having Fido put down when his suffering becomes too much. But, in too many cases, we won't do the same for Granny.

6 months ago

I have done 3 reports on this subject, one when I was a freshman in high school and two when I got into college. I believe strongly that death with dignity should be enforced. I would never want to see someone that I loved suffer. People are always objective towards it, believing it to be equal to murder or being against God, but I don't believe God would want anyone to suffer either. I don't believe it is murder as well. How is it murder? The definition of murder is the unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice. There is no malice what so ever in euthanasia. It is the dying person's wish. They want a peaceful death not a horrible one.

7 months ago

why would you make somebody who wanted to die a dignified and peaceful death do so in a clinical acute setting such a hospital? it is the person who is taking responsibility for their death, and i am sure they would not want the burden of their death on the hospital, nor would they want the hospital involved in such a personal experience. it is one that should be reserved for the people who are closest to the sufferer.

you idiot.

8 months ago

This should be done in a hospital. If someone is receiving a prescription to commit suicide with federal assistance, a hospice should take responsibility.

9 months ago

I am a passionate advocate of 'Death With Dignity', and since Canadian laws, thus far, are not as forward as those of your State, I would like to know if
Canadians could, if required, make arrangements for assistance.
I am a healthy 73, thinking to the future. I have seen relatives die in a horrible manner and would not wish that indignity for myself. I would sincerely appreciate your response. Also the costs involved. Thanks!