 |
|
|
|
|
|
Site Navigator News: |
|||||
American law has long frowned on "self murder," as suicide used to be called. In colonial times, people who killed themselves were ridiculed; their belongings were confiscated by the state; and their burials were ignominious. Those who aided "self-murderers" faced severe criminal penalties. |
|||||
Full text of court cases relevant to the Measure 51 debate: Washington v. Glucksberg FindLaw search:
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|||||||
Measure 51’s Significance |
|||||||
 |
|||||||
Matt Wuerker |
|||||||
Response to last week's cover story ("To Lie For," WW, Sept. 17, 1997) was swift and rabid. "Fucking anti-Catholic fascist assholes!" one reader hollered into the bowels of our voice-mail system. "You don't know the difference between right and wrong!" barked another. Here we go again. This fall's battle over Measure 51, the effort to repeal Oregon's assisted-suicide law, promises to be another in a series of overwrought circus acts disguised as political debate. There are, however, good reasons for the campaign's high pitch. For starters, the basic question--should Oregon allow doctors to help terminally ill patients do themselves in?--raises all manner of questions about the nature of life, to say nothing of potential abuse of any system that allows euthanasia. It also revisits the landscape trampled by the debate over legalized abortion. Then there's the recognition that this fall's campaign puts Oregon back on the cutting edge of American social policy. Despite significant efforts by right-to-die forces elsewhere, ours remains the first--and only--state in the union to have a Death With Dignity Act. There is another, less-understood reason the current campaign over assisted suicide is so important. As a consequence of recent court rulings, its result will have a finality not present in most major initiative and referendum campaigns. Three years ago, when voters here approved Measure 16, most observers knew years of court challenges would ensue before an assisted-suicide law could take effect. Now, on the heels of parallel federal court cases originating here and in the state of Washington, that cushion is gone. In the Washington case, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously that there is no inherent constitutional right "to a personal choice by a mentally competent, terminally ill adult to commit physician assisted suicide." At the same time, the court made it clear that states may create such rights--as Oregon did with Measure 16 in 1994. That measure, too, survived a challenge in federal court. Combined with the Supreme Court decision, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals' ruling in Lee vs. State of Oregon supports the notion that Measure 16 can withstand further legal challenge. In other words, if Measure 51 passes, assisted suicide will remain illegal in Oregon for the foreseeable future. Conversely, if it fails, doctors will be able to help terminally ill patients end their lives. This means the stakes are higher: To the victors in this fall's Measure 51 campaign will go an unusually significant--and final--victory. Thus the arrival here of so much high-powered political machinery. No doubt there will be powerful plays to our emotions and efforts to distort the issues. In such an environment it is essential that information available to voters be as accurate as possible. As our article last week suggested, that will be the great challenge in the campaign over Measure 51. |
|||||||