Supreme Court of the United States Essay Example

intention to limit life-saving measures. Consequently, physicians and pharmacists are immune from prosecution by the federal government for providing drugs to terminally ill patients. As a result, debates on euthanasia and assisted suicide mainly occur at the state level.
In addition, individuals have a constitutional right to decline medical procedures if they are incapacitated, which can be expressed through a living will or a do not resuscitate order. Oregon pioneered assisted suicide legislation in 1994, serving as an example for other states. The Oregon Death with Dignity Act includes safeguards for terminally ill patients, diagnosing physicians, and prescribing pharmacists. It mandates that a physician diagnose a terminal illness projected to cause death within six months. If requested by the patient, a doctor or pharmacist who does not object to assisted suicide can prescribe lethal drugs for consumption at the patient's preferred time.The process of obtaining lethal prescription drugs for mentally competent individuals with terminal illnesses includes several safeguards. These measures involve two witnesses for the initial prescription request, agreement from a second physician on the diagnosis of a terminal illness with a life expectancy of less than six months, confirmation of the patient's mental capacity, and a waiting period of fifteen days before making a final oral request for the prescription. These precautions ensure that individuals can make an informed decision before accessing the drugs.

It is important to note that healthcare providers who are against assisted suicide are not obligated to participate or support it. Washington's Initiative 1000, passed in 2008, has similar provisions and safeguards as Oregon's law. In December 2008, a trial court Judge in Montana ruled that terminally ill patients have the right

to self-administer prescribed lethal doses of drugs. However, this ruling has been appealed to the Montana Supreme Court.

Assisted suicide is still relatively new in Washington and Montana compared to Oregon where there is available data on terminally ill patients using lethal drugs. From 1998 to 2006, a total of 455 prescriptions were written in Oregon for terminally ill individuals, with 292 being used for suicide. This data suggests that approximately 35 terminally ill individuals die each year in Oregon due to assisted suicide. It is also evident that physicians carefully evaluate applicants by issuing an average of 67 prescriptions annually.It is worth noting that 35 percent of prescribed medications remain unused under Oregon's Death with Dignity Act. It should also be mentioned that euthanasia has been legalized in jurisdictions outside of Oregon, Washington, and Montana. Belgium and the Netherlands allow some form of assisted suicide, with the latter recently decriminalizing it as well. While Germany does not have a law legalizing assisted suicide, it has shown leniency towards those who assist in the death of a terminally ill person. Perceptions regarding death and suicide vary based on location and culture. Therefore, while assisted suicide may be accepted in certain parts of the world, it remains criminalized elsewhere.

In the United States, where personal autonomy over one's mind, body, and destiny is highly valued by people, death and suicide are not as culturally stigmatized in some regions compared to others. Assisted suicide provides individuals with control over their own future, allowing them to decide when, where, and how they will die. However, there are practical concerns for those facing death. Often, people with terminal illnesses see their

savings diminish due to increasing medical expenses and insurance costs. Without insurance coverage, they may struggle to afford even basic medications for pain management or symptom relief. Despite having an incurable condition, these individuals often occupy hospital beds in the advanced stages of their illness.The use of valuable healthcare resources and time on patients who cannot be effectively treated and discharged leads to a lack of available remedies for loved ones suffering from terminal illness. Despite understanding the fatal nature of the illness, friends and family members feel powerless to help. Assisted suicide provides an alternative by offering a quick and painless death instead of prolonged suffering. This choice helps conserve medical resources while preventing financial hardship for the patient's family. The opposition to euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide stems from religious and social organizations with strong moral convictions against actions leading to individual deaths. These organizations have the right to advocate for their cause through petitions to elected officials, an integral part of democracy. It is crucial for these groups to acknowledge public support demonstrations in Oregon and Washington, where assisted suicide was approved by majority votes. This recognition extends not only to euthanasia but also physician-assisted suicide, where a doctor oversees the administration of drugs at the chosen time by the patient, ensuring a swift and painless death.Interestingly, some opponents who support capital punishment for certain crimes base their beliefs on the biblical phrase "an eye for an eye." However, they do not endorse ending one's own life when an individual seeks it. In addition, some doctors and physicians who have taken the Hippocratic Oath oppose euthanasia as a requirement for their professional license

because it goes against their responsibility to not harm patients. It is important to note that in Washington and Oregon, laws on assisted suicide do not mandate participation from physicians or pharmacists. Those with moral, professional, or religious objections are not obligated to aid in a patient's suicide. This principle also applies to physician-assisted suicide in countries where it is legal.

Concerns about the mental state of terminally ill individuals who choose suicide are addressed in Oregon and Washington through various measures such as examinations, medications, diagnoses, waiting periods, and assessments of the patient's mental well-being. These measures significantly decrease the likelihood of inconsistent prescribing of lethal drugs.

Furthermore, the death penalty is an authorized form of punishment at both the federal level and in over half of the states. Citizens play a role in determining eligibility for this punishment through participation in the jury system and by electing officials responsible for its enforcement.Euthanasia activists are advocating for the legalization of euthanasia, including physician-assisted suicide and other assisted suicide methods. This is necessary to address a contradiction in many US states, where citizens have the power to determine others' fates but lack control over their own lives. The United States Supreme Court has recognized that pregnant women have the right to choose whether or not to end their pregnancy, highlighting this inconsistency. Legalizing euthanasia would allow individuals suffering from terminal illnesses to make a safe and honorable choice for themselves, maintaining their human dignity. As medical treatments advance and raise concerns about quality of life, discussions on when life should be ended require consideration of individual autonomy and personal responsibility. Euthanasia activists are actively urging lawmakers to

support legislation aligned with their beliefs.The right-to-die movement, gaining momentum as a compassionate option, involves intentionally ending someone's life to alleviate suffering caused by terminal illness. In the final stages of life, an alternative approach called hospice care focuses on managing pain, controlling symptoms, and providing support for the patient's family. Informed consent is when patients understand the risks, benefits, and alternatives of medical procedures and give permission for them. Physician-assisted suicide occurs when a doctor deliberately provides lethal drugs upon an individual's request for self-administration. Advocates of the right to die believe that individuals should have control over their time, place, and manner of death. Terminal illness refers to a condition where treatment options are no longer available due to its advanced stage. Euthanasia has been practiced but is not universally accepted; however, it contradicts the Hippocratic Oath traditionally taken by U.S. medical practitioners which explicitly opposes providing or suggesting deadly medicine and causing harm to any patient. Early American statutes prohibited both suicide and assisted suicide.In the early 1900s, euthanasia became a topic of public debate when Dr. Harry J. Wassailed made a difficult decision regarding a deformed child born to Anna Bollixing. He consulted with the hospital's chief of staff and advised against performing surgery to save the child. Unfortunately, the baby girl died five days later, sparking widespread discussion about Dr. Hacienda's choice.

During this time period, known as the sass, the Great Depression caused significant distress and led to an increase in suicide rates. This further fueled conversations about euthanasia and self-determination in end-of-life matters. Public opinion polls indicated that there was growing acceptance of euthanasia under certain circumstances.

However, support for

legalized assistance in causing another person's death diminished after World War II and news of Nazi death camps shocked the world. Consequently, discussions concerning euthanasia mostly occurred within specific groups during this period.

The euthanasia debate resurfaced on a national level in 1990 with Karen Ann Quintal's case. Quintal lost consciousness after consuming alcohol and prescription drugs at a party, reigniting discussions about euthanasia. Doctors concluded that she was in a "persistent vegetative state" with little chance of recovery.

The Quintal family fought a year-long court battle for the right to remove Karen's respirator, which would likely result in her death. Eventually, they emerged victorious and Karen's respirator was taken off.
Surprisingly, she continued breathing naturally for nearly a decade before pneumonia complications resulted in her passing. In 1980, Derek Humphrey founded the Hemlock Society with the purpose of advocating for euthanasia legislation. Over time, the right-to-die movement gained consensus and brought attention to patients' rights. More states have implemented laws recognizing living wills that express an individual's desires regarding life-prolonging treatments, including their withdrawal or refusal. Euthanasia has been influenced by significant cases in the US, such as the Quintal case which led to the establishment of ethics committees in healthcare institutions supporting advanced directives on end-of-life care. The Curran v. Director, Missouri Department of Health case marked a pivotal Supreme Court ruling on the right-to-die movement in 1990. Nancy Curran's parents requested the removal of her feeding tube after she became permanently unconscious due to a car accident; most of Caravan's hospitalization costs were covered by the State of Missouri. While a district court approved the removal of the feeding tube, an appeal was made to

the Missouri Supreme Court by the director of Missouri Department of Health seeking clear evidence of Caravan's wishes regarding end-of-life care. Eventually, this case reached and was decided upon by the US Supreme Court which recognized that competent individuals possess a constitutional right to refuse medical treatment.States have the authority to require sufficient evidence of a patient's desires for end-of-life treatment. In this particular case, there was no proof that Curran wished for life-sustaining treatment to be stopped. Jack Savoring, who had been acquitted in the past for aiding in patients' suicides, received a prison sentence after administering a lethal injection on Thomas Yuk during an episode of 60 Minutes. He served eight years for second-degree murder due to Yuk's Lou Gehrig's disease before being released on parole in 2007.

Terrier Caviar's family engaged in a seven-year legal battle concerning her rights regarding end-of-life care. The Florida Supreme Court overturned "Terries Law" following extensive legal proceedings, without any involvement from the US Supreme Court. Terrier passed away thirteen days later. Euthanasia laws differ among countries. It is illegal in the United States but permitted in some other nations.

For instance, euthanasia was briefly legalized in Australia's Northern Territory in 1995 before being reversed two years later. On the contrary, both Netherlands and Belgium formally authorized euthanasia in 2002. Luxembourg also joined them by legalizing euthanasia for individuals with terminal illnesses or incurable diseases/conditions in 2008The main argument centers around the relationship between assisted suicide and an individual's right to make private decisions about their own death. This includes determining when and under what circumstances it should occur. The right to choose to end one's life is considered

fundamental, particularly for mentally competent terminally ill individuals who have various reasons for wanting to do so. These reasons may include unbearable pain, loss of personal dignity, or not wanting to burden their families further. It is crucial that no one denies this personal choice or condemns someone to a prolonged and agonizing death.

Despite legal restrictions on assisted suicide, the practice continues, but legalizing it would allow for easier regulation and protection against abuse. The term "euthanasia" comes from a Greek phrase meaning "easy death," which refers to relieving the suffering of terminally ill individuals through killing them. There are different terms associated with euthanasia, including passive euthanasia, physician-assisted suicide (also known as voluntary passive euthanasia or VIE), active euthanasia, and involuntary euthanasia.

Passive euthanasia involves actions such as removing life support equipment, ending artificial supplies of food and water, or choosing not to administer cardiac-pulmonary resuscitation. Physician-assisted suicide occurs when a physician provides information or means to death while the patient carries out the act.Active euthanasia involves the administration of a controlled substance in response to a patient's request for death. Involuntary euthanasia, on the other hand, is when a patient who has not explicitly requested it is killed, often because they are in a coma or persistent vegetative state.

The U.S. Supreme Court differentiates between suicide and refusing treatment or using pain medication. Administering an overdose of morphine for pain relief is legally acceptable as long as death is not the intended outcome.

States have the ability to pass laws regarding assisted suicide, although its guarantee by the Constitution is not guaranteed. Oregon, currently the only state where assisted suicide is legal, allows mentally competent terminally

ill patients with less than six months to live to request lethal drugs from two doctors. The patient must administer the dose themselves.

Although prohibited by law, assisted suicide still occurs in some states. Terminally ill individuals may rely on assistance from loved ones while doctors may withhold life support or provide lethal doses of painkilling drugs upon patient request for extreme pain.

Legalizing assisted suicide would allow for better regulation and prevention of potential abuse, particularly benefiting financially disadvantaged patients who cannot afford medication while they are alive.Unfortunately, patients with more wealth have a greater chance of finding doctors who are willing to assist them in ending their suffering. There are several factors that contribute to inadequate pain relief for patients, including lack of insurance coverage for specialized hospice care, medical ignorance, fear of liability, and insufficient hospital funding. If assisted suicide becomes legal, states should establish guidelines similar to the "BANE-Generated Guidelines for Comprehensive Care of the Terminally Ill" developed by the Bay Area Network of Ethics Committees in September 1996. These guidelines ensure optimal medical care and effective pain management. While terminal sedation (the induction of a coma using drugs) is legally acceptable in many cases, it does not fully serve as an alternative to assisted suicide. There is still uncertainty about whether terminal sedation effectively eliminates suffering and awareness for patients. Legalizing assisted suicide can provide emotional security for terminally ill patients and potentially make their end-of-life experience more manageable. It may discourage some patients from attempting suicide while they are still physically capable and encourage them to choose treatments that could prolong their lives. This legal option has the potential to improve

doctor-patient relationships by addressing patients' concerns about excessive treatment.The Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution states that no state can deny a person their right to life, liberty, or property without proper legal procedures. The Supreme Court has used the "Due Process Clause" to protect an individual's right to make decisions about personal matters important for their dignity and autonomy (Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 1992). In West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnett, it was recognized that public authorities cannot impose traditional beliefs in areas like politics, nationalism, religion, or other opinions. Furthermore, in Curran v. Missouri (1990), the Chief Justice emphasized that choosing between life and death is a deeply personal decision with significant and irreversible consequences. Various historical legal interpretations also support individuals' rights to choose when and how they end their own lives.