Newspaper logo  
  The Fraud of Physician-Assisted Suicide


The Fraud of Physician-Assisted Suicide

by Sheldon Richman

How can there be "death with dignity" when the patient must humbly petition the doctors, then meekly wait for a unanimous ruling?
Freedom is so little understood in this "land of the free" that it is often confused with its opposite. Case in point: Oregon's 1994 Death With Dignity Act, which a federal appeals court recently shielded from attack by US Attorney General John Ashcroft.

The law permits what has come to be known as physician-assisted suicide. It and the appellate ruling have been hailed as victories for patient autonomy and the right to commit suicide. Indeed, the New York Times, in praising the ruling, editorialized. "The voters of Oregon acted with great humanity when they decided to allow terminally ill people to determine when they have suffered enough."

But did the voters really do that? A closer look at the law shows they did not.

In fact the law lets a patient who is expected to die within six months ask his doctor for lethal drugs. The doctor can say no, as he has every right to do. But since a patient cannot end his own life without the doctor's consent, the law is no milestone on the road to individual freedom.

What happens when a patient makes such a request of his doctor? The state's requirements are "stringent," according to Dr. Peter Goodwin, a long-time family physician and an emeritus associate professor in the Department of Family Medicine at Oregon Health and Science University. They include, Goodwin writes, "the attending physician's diagnosis/prognosis and determination that the patient is informed, capable and acting voluntarily."

Note that the attending physician must be convinced that the patient knows what he's doing. Whether or not you think doctors have a special ability to see the absence of volition in an action (I don't), this requirement is hardly consistent with "allow[ing] terminally ill people to determine when they have suffered enough."

But there's more. The law states, "A consulting physician must examine the patient and the medical records and concur with the attending physician's diagnosis/prognosis and assessment of the patient."

Dr. Goodwin comments: "If the attending physician or the consulting physician thinks the patient may suffer from a psychological disorder causing impaired judgment, the physician must refer the patient for evaluation and counseling. No medication may be prescribed unless it is certain the patient's judgment is not impaired" (emphasis added).

Although these requirements are called "stringent," they are actually elastic and stacked against the patient. What terminally ill patient in great pain could not be said to have impaired judgment? What's the difference between a judgment that's impaired and one that clashes with the doctor's? In a conflict between a patient who sees no better future and wants to die and a physician (perhaps supported by the patient's family) who sees the future differently, who will prevail? The doctor, of course. Yet the law is considered a blow for patient autonomy. How can there be "death with dignity" when the patient must humbly petition the doctors, then meekly wait for a unanimous ruling?

Whatever one thinks of the legal merits of Attorney General Ashcroft's attempt to use federal anti-drug laws to thwart Oregon's voters, physician-assisted suicide is a fraud. As Dr. Thomas Szasz writes in his book Fatal Freedom: The Ethics and Politics of Suicide, "The term 'physician-assisted suicide' [PAS] is intrinsically mendacious. The physician is the principal, not the assistant. In the normal use of the English language, the person who assists another is the subordinate; the person whom he assists is his superior.... However, the physician engaging in PAS is superior to the patient: He determines who qualifies for the 'treatment' and prescribes the drug for it."

In other words, the Oregon law has nothing to do with the freedom of the individual and everything to do with the power of doctors. If freedom were the concern, we would simply repeal the drug and prescription laws, and recognize each adult's right to buy any kind of drugs.

Why empower doctors? Suicide isn't a medical issue. It's a moral issue.

Sheldon Richman is senior fellow at The Future of Freedom Foundation ( in Fairfax, Va., author of Tethered Citizens: Time to Repeal the Welfare State, and editor of The Freeman magazine.

Copyright © 2004 The Baltimore Chronicle. All rights reserved.

Republication or redistribution of Baltimore Chronicle content is expressly prohibited without their prior written consent.

This story was published on June 28, 2004.
Local News & Opinion

Ref. : Civic Events

Ref. : Arts & Education Events

Ref. : Public Service Notices

Books, Films, Arts & Education
Open Letters:

Ref. : Letters to the editor

Health Care & Environment

11.27 Open Season Is Seen in Gene Editing of Animals

11.27 Prince Charles in plan to help investors take polluting firms to court

11.27 EU-US trade deal will unleash oil sands and fatally undermine climate efforts

11.27 Unilever to stop using coal for energy within five years

11.25 Experts discuss how to build a carbon-free energy industry

11.25 Somaliland stricken by drought: 'We need what all humans need'

11.25 What can the world learn from Växjö, Europe's self-styled greenest city?

11.24 Weather disasters occurred almost daily over last decade, UN says

11.24 Most of Britain's major cities pledge to run on green energy by 2050

11.23 The Gene Hackers

11.23 First EPA chief accuses Republicans of ignoring science for political gain

News Media Matters

11.27 America Is Too Dumb for TV News

Daily: FAIR Blog
The Daily Howler

US Politics, Policy & 'Culture'

11.27 Donald Trump’s Police State

11.27 Inside the Republicans’ Opposition Research Machine

11.27 Rubio’s slippery obfuscation: It’s becoming impossible to know what he really believes

11.25 Why white people aren’t called “terrorist”: The media accepts that “people who resort to violence are left-wing or Arab or both” [fighting to change a racist culture head-on]

11.24 Five people shot at Black Lives Matter protest in Minneapolis: Police

11.24 8,855 Murders by Firearm in US in 2012 vs. 30 (Equiv. 164) in UK [graphics, video]

11.24 Part 4: A reservation town fighting alcoholism, obesity and ghosts from the past

11.24 Donald Trump doesn't care what's true, just what his base feels is true

11.24 Republicans think being pro-family means forcing women to have babies

Justice Matters
High Crimes?

11.24 Saudi Arabia: Poet Sentenced to Death for Apostasy [Saudi Arabia: an ISIS-like Islamist theocracy...]

Economics, Crony Capitalism

11.27 Paris climate talks: powerful business lobbies seek to undermine deal

11.25 Fossil fuel companies risk wasting $2tn of investors' money, study says

11.23 Pfizer and Allergan poised to announce history's biggest healthcare merger


11.27 The Connection Between Vibrant Neighborhoods and Economic Growth

11.27 Bernie Sanders Gets Immigration Policy Right

11.27 Somalia's fragile security puts aid out of reach for many who desperately need it

11.25 Who owns our cities – and why this urban takeover should concern us all

11.25 Angela Merkel stands by refugee policy despite security fears

11.25 Cultural figures and rights groups call for release of poet facing execution [fighting to change a barbaric Islamist culture head-on]

11.25 Manuel Valls: the French PM taking a hard line against terror

11.24 Muslims are integrated in France, but the bad guys want a clash of civilizations

11.24 Turkish military official says fighter jets destroyed plane after it violated country’s airspace, which Russia denies

11.24 Government ‘must do more to help vulnerable households this winter’

We are a non-profit Internet-only newspaper publication founded in 1973. Your donation is essential to our survival.

You can also mail a check to:
Baltimore News Network, Inc.
P.O. Box 42581
Baltimore, MD 21284-2581
This site Web

Public Service Ads: