A Graceful Exit: Redefining Terminal to Expand the Availability of Physician-Facilitated Suicide
Loading...
Date
2012
Authors
Lewis, Browne C.
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
University of Oregon School of Law
Abstract
For almost ten years, Oregon stood alone as the state that
permitted terminally ill persons to choose the time and manner of
their deaths. Finally, in 2009, Oregon received company when the
State of Washington’s physician-facilitated suicide statute officially
went into effect in March of that year. Supporters of the statutes
hailed the enactments as a victory for persons seeking to die with
dignity. Persons from groups like Compassion & Choices vowed to
seek similar legislation in the remaining states. Representatives from
the Washington State Medical Association, hospice groups and
hospitals argued that the mandates of the statutes place physicians in
an unnatural position. In particular, the Medical Association’s
spokesman stated that physicians take an oath to save lives, not end
them.
Despite these objections, the number of persons in the country who
support physician-facilitated suicide has continued to grow. At the
end of 2009, the Montana Supreme Court indicated that physicianfacilitated
suicide is not against the state’s public policy.
This Article does not join the debate about the legalization of
physician-assisted suicide. Rather, I have two goals. First, I suggest
ways the current statutes could be improved to address the concerns
of the critics of physician-facilitated suicide. Second, I recommend
ways to expand the availability of physician-facilitated suicide so that
more people can exit gracefully. To that end, I analyze the laws in
Oregon and Washington and argue that the current statutes need to
be amended to effectuate their legislative purposes. That analysis
shows that the legislatures in those states attempted to regulate the process in order to protect the interests of terminally ill patients and
physicians. The statutory mandates are a step in the right direction,
but much work remains to truly honor those interests.
The statutes should be amended to close certain loopholes and to
ensure that the physician-facilitated suicide option is available to all
of the patients who need it. Persons suffering from physical
conditions that will lead to death within six months should not be the
only persons permitted to exit gracefully. As long as the safeguards
included in the statutes are followed, there is no good reason to
prohibit persons suffering from irreversible and incurable physical
diseases that lead to death from being classified as terminal.
In addition, persons diagnosed with irreversible and incurable
brain disorders, like severe dementia or Alzheimer’s disease, should
be able to avail themselves of the rights provided by the physicianfacilitated
suicide statutes. Alzheimer’s patients suffer a slow, painful
death. They revert to childhood and forget everyone around them. The
mental death they suffer is similar to the physical death experienced
by terminally physically ill patients. During the early stages of the
disease, most Alzheimer sufferers are still competent enough to
request physician-facilitated suicide. Therefore, the statutes should be
amended or interpreted to give them that option.
Description
38 pages
Keywords
Citation
91Or. L. Rev. 457 (2012)