Folksonomics

The Supreme Court ruled in January against the U.S. federal government’s attempt to end Oregon’s one-of-a-kind physician-assisted suicide law, a decision that has people of faith either celebrating or in an uproar.

Additionally, while the Supreme Court ruling hinged on a technical point regarding the distribution of medical drugs, some people of faith are concerned that states will enact similar laws around the country.

The Supreme Court addressed the Oregon Death with Dignity Act, which was enacted in 1997 and is quite specific. The act covers only extremely sick people those terminally ill, whom at least two doctors agree have a maximum of six months to live who are of sound mind. It allows terminally ill patients to receive a lethal prescription from their doctors that they administer themselves.

In a 6-3 majority, the Supreme Court overruled Gonzales v. Oregon. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote that the U.S. government’s attempt to thwart physician-assisted suicide with the Controlled Substances Act which bars doctors from issuing prescriptions not for “legitimate medical purpose” was “broad and unusual authority.” Writing for the majority, Kennedy wrote, “the statute manifests no intent to regulate the practice of medicine generally.”

In the dissenting opinion, Justice Antonin Scalia wrote on behalf of himself and Justices John Roberts and Clarence Thomas. He wrote, “If the term ‘legitimate medical purpose’ has any meaning, it surely excludes the prescription of drugs to produce death.” He cited Webster’s Dictionary when describing the function of medicine as the “science and art dealing with the prevention, cure, or alleviation of disease.”

The case began in 2004, when then-Attorney General John Ashcroft issued a directive that Oregon doctors who assist their patients in suicide under Oregon’s Death With Dignity Act violate the federal Controlled Substances Act. This was issued on the same day his resignation was announced.

This opinion, though narrowly focused, has some people of faith worried that it has greater implications.

“Physician assisted suicide is corruption of the medical profession,” said Edward Ferton, a staff ethicist at the National Catholic Bioethics Council. “The aim of medicine is to cure or heal, not kill.”

Ferton called physician-assisted suicide, “immoral” and that it is the “destruction of the gift of life a gift from God.”

However, proponents of Oregon’s Death with Dignity Act say it honors human dignity instead of compromising it.

“This ruling says, ‘you have the right to make your own choice with dignity and humanity,” said George Eighmey, executive director of Compassion & Choices of Oregon. “I can exit [life] on my terms and no one else’s” and I don’t have to abide by someone else’s beliefs.

Those of Jewish faith believe this is a personal issue, which means members of the faith can choose their own stance on physician-assisted suicide.

“Judaism doesn’t have any one stance on anything. The one constant is that one is always supposed to seek the truth in the wisdom of the present moment,” said Rabbi Ariel Stone of Shir Tikvah Synagogue in Oregon. “We should have reverence for life and humility in the face of life. I believe what that leads to is the understanding that we cannot prolong life, that in itself is an act of arrogance.”

“It has never made sense to me that faith would stop at dying,” added Stone. “God brought us into this world, why shouldn’t God have help to take us out. It just doesn’t make sense otherwise. I want the same loving hands to help me out that helped me in, and I see God in both of those acts.”

The issue remains highly disputed in the medical profession.

“This law restores a sense of control to patients,” said Dr. Nancy Crumpacker, a retired oncologist from Oregon. “This is all about patients. It’s not about the medical powers that be.”

Yet, Dr. Kenneth Stevens of the foundation Physicians for Compassionate Care, which has opposed the law, told the Associated Press that he worries the terminally ill may feel pressure to end their lives. He noted the American Medical Association also is against the Death with Dignity Act.

A total of 208 people mostly cancer patients have taken the lethal prescription from 1998 through 2004, according to The Associated Press.

Eighmey said he has been privileged to be with several people when they have taken the prescription and that many of these times have been celebratory, sometimes incorporating religious ceremonies.

“This is a family event,” said Eighmey. “They want to have the right to say goodbye. There is love and caring, humanity and dignity.”

Heather J. Ciras is book editor at Science & Theology News.