To Hang On or Let Go

Last November, U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft declared that he would hunt down doctors who help terminally ill patients commit suicide. The move was prompted by a law in Oregon that legalizes doctor-assisted suicide. He said that doctors who prescribe drugs to help patients die face suspension or revocation of their privileges to prescribe federally controlled drugs.

Ashcroft’s decision to crack down on doctors while the nation is preoccupied with international events is especially alarming. Oregon is the only state that has passed a law legalizing assisted suicide and Ashcroft seems to want to make the state an example so others will not follow suit. So far, the other 49 states prohibit doctors from dispensing controlled substances for the purpose of ending a patient’s life. Oregon became the exception in 1994, when 51 percent of the state’s voters approved a referendum establishing the state’s Death with Dignity Act.

Ashcroft claims that the act violates the federal Controlled Substances Act (CSA). However, he also feels strongly that physician-assisted suicide is wrong and fears it allows physicians to abuse their power and act against the best interests of patients. However, the voters of Oregon were not hasty when voting for the law. While the act does legalize physician-assisted suicide, it does so only under tightly restricted circumstances. For example, it does not allow doctors themselves to administer lethal medication in the same way practiced by the infamous Dr. Jack Kevorkian. Instead, a physician can prescribe a lethal dose of medication to a terminally ill patient who then decides if and when to use it. Self-administration helps ensure that the patient is acting voluntarily. Other restrictions demand that the patient’s request for lethal medication be in writing and signed before two witnesses. Two physicians have to confirm that the patient suffers from “an incurable and irreversible disease that has been medically confirmed and will, within reasonable medical judgment, produce death within six months.”

The legalization of physician-assisted suicide is actually safer than the alternative of letting patients find their own ways to kill themselves. When regulated, it is more predictable and less secretive. It also gives the family time to prepare itself and holds patients accountable for their actions.

Defenders of the Oregon law, including some people who personally oppose legalized physician-assisted suicide, have accused Ashcroft and the Bush Administration of hypocrisy. All five of Oregon’s House members have condemned Ashcroft’s action against the state. Ashcroft seems to support states’ rights only when the states are exercising their rights in a manner that pleases him and the president.

Ashcroft insists that he is a strong advocate for states’ rights but feels that there are circumstances when federal policy should prevail. One such circumstance would be where the actions in one state interfere with the actions of another state. For example, if the sale of marijuana were legal in Oregon, it would undermine the other states’ efforts to reduce drug trafficking. But the Death with Dignity Act has not attracted people from other states—the law allows lethal prescriptions to be given only to patients who are residents of Oregon.

The Supreme Court has suggested that assisted suicide is a matter for the states and has written that “Throughout the nation, Americans are engaged in an earnest and profound debate about the morality, legality, and practicality of physician assisted suicide. Our holding permits this debate to continue, as it should in a democratic society.”

Therefore, if Ashcroft wants to end physician-assisted suicide, he should work with Congress to get a specific federal law to ban physician-assisted suicide. By trying to ignore the voters of Oregon, Ashcroft defrauds our democracy of the open debate it needs.

Anat Maytal ’05, a Crimson editor, lives in Thayer Hall.