Montana becomes third state to legalize physician-assisted suicide
In a move that is both ethically profound and (so far, at least) politically rare, Montana has become the third state to legalize physician-assisted suicide.
A divided state supreme court that neither state law nor public policy prevented doctors from prescribing lethal drugs to terminally-ill patients who want to end their lives.
In essence, the court ruled, suicide is not a crime. The majority justices wrote:
鈥淲e find nothing in Montana Supreme Court precedent or Montana statutes indicating that physician aid in dying is against public policy. The 鈥榓gainst public policy鈥� exception to consent has been interpreted by this court as applicable to violent breaches of the public peace. Physician aid in dying does not satisfy that definition. We also find nothing in the plain language of Montana statutes indicating that physician aid in dying is against public policy. In physician aid in dying, the patient 鈥� not the physician 鈥� commits the final death-causing act by self-administering a lethal dose of medicine.鈥�
Northwest pattern
The ruling 鈥� which is likely to be challenged in the legislature and perhaps in a voter referendum 鈥� follows a pattern in the Pacific Northwest.
In November 2008, voters in Washington State approved a ballot initiative allowing terminally ill, legally competent adults to obtain lethal prescriptions without exposing themselves or their doctors to criminal prosecution. The Washington measure was modeled on Oregon鈥檚 Death with Dignity Act enacted in 1997 following voter approval and upheld by the US Supreme Court in 2006.
The strictly prohibits 鈥渓ethal injection, mercy killing, or active euthanasia.鈥� But it allows mentally competent adults who declare their intentions in writing, and have been diagnosed as terminally ill, to take a doctor-prescribed lethal drug themselves, orally, after a waiting period.
Since the law went into effect in 1998, about 40 people a year this way. Last year, 60 individuals did so (out of 88 who received the prescriptions).
No violations of Oregon law
Over the years, there have been no reported violations under the law 鈥� no evidence that individuals have been pressured by doctors or family members. And Oregon has become noted for the quality of end-of-life care, especially the use of hospices.
Missoula attorney Mark Connell, who represented plaintiff physicians and patients, described the decision as 鈥渁 victory for individual rights over government control.鈥�
鈥淭he Montana Supreme Court has now recognized that, where intensely personal and private choices regarding end-of-life care are involved, Montana law entrusts those decisions to the individuals whose lives are at stake, not the government,鈥� he said in a statement released by , the main group lobbying in favor of physician-assisted suicide.
Pro-life groups took a different view.
Jeff Laszloffy of the Montana Family Foundation told , 鈥淒efinitely not what we wanted, but not as bad as it could have been.鈥�
鈥淲hat the court did, in essence, was to place the issue back into the hands of the legislature, where it should be,鈥� Mr. Laszloffy said. 鈥淭hey said there鈥檚 nothing currently in statute that prohibits the practice. It鈥檚 now up to us to go into the next legislative session fully armed and ready to pass statutory language that says, once and for all, that physician assisted suicide is illegal in Montana.鈥�
-----
Follow us on .
