NCJ Number
172527
Journal
Criminal Law Bulletin Volume: 33 Issue: 3 Dated: (May-June 1997) Pages: 226-261
Date Published
1997
Length
36 pages
Annotation
The activities of Dr. Kevorkian and the ability of modern medicine to prolong the life of patients whose conditions are not likely to ever improve have led to an intense debate about euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide, and whether individuals have the right to die.
Abstract
During the past decade, the debate has returned to the morality of euthanasia and assisted suicide, especially since 1993 when Dr. Kevorkian assisted his first suicide. Euthanasia and assisted suicide differ in the degree of physician involvement. There are basically two independent but related arguments in favor of legalizing euthanasia and assisted suicide: (1) If a dying patient is suffering great pain that cannot be controlled with medication, it is cruel to force that person to continue living; and (2) People should be able to decide for themselves how to conduct their lives and how they die. There are essentially three arguments against legalizing euthanasia and assisted suicide: (1) Killing is wrong; (2) Physician involvement in euthanasia and assisted suicide corrupts the medical profession's integrity; and (3) The fear is that legalizing euthanasia and assisted suicide will extend to individuals who are not terminally ill. The U.S. Supreme Court has yet to rule on the constitutionality of statutes prohibiting assisted suicide. Legal background information on the right to die is presented, and relevant court cases are described. 113 footnotes