Wednesday, August 10, 2016

New Mexico Supreme Court States Assisted Suicide Is Not A Civil Right, Euthanasia Inevitable


Annette Hanson, MD
Originally published July 7, 2016 in Clinical Psychiatry News, updated July 9, 2016, by Annette Hanson, MD

New Mexico [has become] the latest state to throw out a challenge to a law banning physician assisted suicide. In Morris v. Brandenburg, proponents of the right-to-die movement claimed that medical aid-in-dying was a fundamental right, meaning that any law which restricted the right should be presumed to be invalid unless the state had a compelling reason for the restriction. In a unanimous decision, the New Mexico Supreme Court held that there was no such right under that state's constitution, and that even if the right had existed the state had several compelling reasons to restrict it

Friday, July 1, 2016

Decision Allowing Assisted Suicide Overturned

New Mexico Supreme Court
Today, the New Mexico Supreme Court upheld a criminal statute prohibiting "assisting suicide" as constitutional when applied to "physician aid in dying," meaning physician-assisted suicide. The 5-0 decision states in part:
[W]e agree with the legitimate concern that recognizing a right to physician aid in dying will lead to voluntary or involuntary euthanasia because if it is a right, it must be made available to everyone, even when a duly appointed surrogate makes the decision, and even when the patient is unable to self-administer the life-ending medication. . . .
[The] statute is neither unconstitutional or its face nor as it is applied to Petitioners. . . . [W]e reverse the district court's contrary conclusion and remand to the district court for proceedings consistent with this opinion.  (Emphasis added). [pp. 31 & 57]

Friday, May 23, 2014

Oregon Doctor Finds Fault with State's Law

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/letters/articles/2011/10/04/oregon_doctor_finds_fault_with_states_law/  
  +
I am a doctor practicing medicine in Oregon and Washington, where physician-assisted suicide is legal. I disagree with Scot Lehigh that these suicides are not like other suicides in which “a healthy person [takes] his life for reasons of despair, depression, or hopelessness’’ (“Death with dignity in Mass.,’’ Op-ed, Sept. 23).

First, doctors can be wrong. So, what looks like a few months to live can be years. For a good article on this subject, see Nina Shapiro’s January 2009 "Terminal Uncertainty" in the Seattle Weekly.

Second, despair, depression, and hopelessness are a part of assisted suicide. A few years ago, a patient of mine who was undergoing cancer treatment with a specialist became depressed, and expressed a wish for assisted suicide.

In most jurisdictions, suicidal ideation is interpreted as a cry for help. In Oregon, the only help my patient got was a lethal prescription intended to kill him.  Don’t make our mistake. Keep assisted suicide out of Massachusetts.

Dr. Charles J. Bentz
Portland, Ore.
The writer is an associate professor of medicine in the division of general medicine and geriatrics at Oregon Health & Science University.