Whose life is it, anyway? The federal government vs. the state of Oregon on the legality of physician-assisted suicide

This chapter examines whether the state should permit an individual to end their own life. Physician-assisted suicide is only one way in which a doctor can hasten an individual’s death. In fact there are three ways in which a doctor may act. First, they can be passive by allowing an individual to die. Second, they can assist an individual by enabling them to bring about their own death. Third, they can be active in hastening an individual’s death by administering life-ending medication. The chapter argues that a doctor should be permitted to assist an individual to end their own life, as well as to intervene to hasten their death. It supports this view by appealing to the value of freedom, specifically the freedom to choose how to live and die. The chapter then considers the worry that it is wrong for the state to allow a doctor to assist an individual to end their life, since this is an affront to the sanctity of life. It outlines some implications of this argument for the design of public policy.

Download Full-text

Death and the State

Almost Over ◽

10.1093/oso/9780190097158.003.0008 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 245-296

Author(s):

F. M. Kamm

Keyword(s):

Capital Punishment ◽

Empirical Data ◽

Assisted Suicide ◽

The State ◽

Moral Rights ◽

Physician Assisted Suicide ◽

Role Of The State ◽

Constitutional Right ◽

Distinctive Role

Chapter 8 considers how one should reason about assisted suicide as a matter of public (and legal) policy in the absence of a constitutional right to it by critically examining anti-legalization views such as those of Ezekiel Emanuel. The chapter considers the role of (i) moral rights and wrongings and how they come about as well as (ii) harms and benefits and how to aggregate them. How arguments for the distinctive role of the state in enabling or interfering with behavior bears on these issues is considered by reviewing some arguments about capital punishment. Finally, in the light of empirical data about effects of legalizing physician-assisted suicide and given what else Emanuel believes, the chapter considers whether he should no longer oppose legalization.

Download Full-text

Physician-Assisted Suicide in Oregon: The ‘Death with Dignity’ Data

Medical Law International ◽

10.1177/096853320700800301 ◽

2007 ◽

Vol 8 (3) ◽

pp. 197-220 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Wendy E. Hiscox

Keyword(s):

Empirical Data ◽

Assisted Suicide ◽

The State ◽

Voluntary Euthanasia ◽

Physician Assisted Suicide ◽

Death With Dignity ◽

The World ◽

Death With Dignity Act ◽

Dignity Act

Pressure to permit voluntary euthanasia and/or physician-assisted suicide is mounting in several jurisdictions around the world. The state of Oregon, which legalised physician-assisted suicide in 1997, provides valuable guidance on the feasibility of effective regulation. The Oregon experience provides the focus of this article. The article comprises two parts. Part I critically analyses the Oregon Death with Dignity Act and evaluates the adequacy of the legislative safeguards. Part II examines the implementation of the Death with Dignity Act. It outlines the significant official findings since physician-assisted suicide was legalised, and calls attention to worrisome aspects and identifiable trends. It then provides an overall assessment of the legislation in light of the available empirical data.

Download Full-text

Euthanasia and Related Practices Worldwide

Crisis ◽

10.1027/0227-5910.19.3.109 ◽

1998 ◽

Vol 19 (3) ◽

pp. 109-115 ◽

Cited By ~ 9

Author(s):

Michael J Kelleher † ◽

Derek Chambers ◽

Paul Corcoran ◽

Helen S Keeley ◽

Eileen Williamson

Keyword(s):

Assisted Suicide ◽

International Association ◽

Active Euthanasia ◽

Physician Assisted Suicide ◽

Passive Euthanasia ◽

Medical Practitioners ◽

General Acceptance ◽

International Importance ◽

Controversial Area ◽

Active And Passive Euthanasia

The present paper examines the occurrence of matters relating to the ending of life, including active euthanasia, which is, technically speaking, illegal worldwide. Interest in this most controversial area is drawn from many varied sources, from legal and medical practitioners to religious and moral ethicists. In some countries, public interest has been mobilized into organizations that attempt to influence legislation relating to euthanasia. Despite the obvious international importance of euthanasia, very little is known about the extent of its practice, whether passive or active, voluntary or involuntary. This examination is based on questionnaires completed by 49 national representatives of the International Association for Suicide Prevention (IASP), dealing with legal and religious aspects of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide, as well as suicide. A dichotomy between the law and medical practices relating to the end of life was uncovered by the results of the survey. In 12 of the 49 countries active euthanasia is said to occur while a general acceptance of passive euthanasia was reported to be widespread. Clearly, definition is crucial in making the distinction between active and passive euthanasia; otherwise, the entire concept may become distorted, and legal acceptance may become more widespread with the effect of broadening the category of individuals to whom euthanasia becomes an available option. The “slippery slope” argument is briefly considered.

Download Full-text