THE OREGON DEATH with Dignity Act has made its debut in the highest court in the United
States. Arguments surrounding the case Gonzales v. Oregon were introduced Wednesday, October 5, 2005, in the Supreme Court. Initial reports
are that the Supreme Court judges seem closely divided on the issues before them.
The court deliberations focus on the legality of the Attorney General's power to limit
the state's right to distribute controlled substances to assist suicide. Yet, this
legal argument seems to stem directly from our cultural and societal ambivalence with
decisions about life and death. On one level, we, as health professions, have little
hesitancy in prolonging lives of those who have expressed their wish to die. However,
we find it inconceivable that we should assist in shortening the lives of others who
have expressed their wish to die on their own terms, death with dignity. Often, our
personal ambivalence about life and death is reflected in our professional actions.
At a very personal level, most of us would express willingness to end our own lives
in the face of a terminal illness, choosing our own time and place of death, even
if we later choose not to do so. The Oregon Death with Dignity Law permits individuals
to make this decision with legal access to medications, in lethal doses, prescribed
by a physician.
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Archives of Psychiatric NursingAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
Article info
Identification
Copyright
© 2006 Elsevier Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
