Assisted-suicide advocates trying new tack
June 27, 1997
Web posted at: 8:22 p.m. EDT (0022 GMT)
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Advocates of physician-assisted suicide
promised a renewed effort Friday to get the practice
legalized in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling against it.
Barbara Coombs Lee, executive director of Compassion in
Dying, announced the formation of an organization that will
try to bring laws on assisted dying in line with what she
said was public opinion supporting the idea.
"Right now, the environment is ripe for rogues like Jack
Kevorkian in every state to start doing whatever they see
fit, answerable to no one," Coombs Lee said.
"Very unlikely that they would ever be prosecuted,
practically impossible that they would ever be convicted."
The new Compassion Center for End of Life Law and Policy will
be headed by Kathryn Tucker, who argued against the
Washington and New York assisted-suicide bans before the
Supreme Court.
It was Coombs Lee's Seattle organization that sponsored the
assisted-suicide cases decided Thursday by the Supreme Court.
Its justices unanimously ruled that people have no right to
constitutional right to doctor-assisted suicide.
But the court left open the question of whether terminally
ill, competent people in untreatable pain have a right to
medical help to hasten death. The rulings also left room for
doctors to continue giving dying patients large amounts of
painkillers, even if the drugs might bring on death.
Coombs Lee said the Compassion in Dying Federation of America
would also work on the issue through local affiliates,
currently in Washington, California and soon Oregon, which
has the only law permitting doctor-assisted suicide.
That law, which has not gone into effect because of legal
challenges, would let doctors prescribe a lethal dose of
painkillers to a terminally ill patient. A referendum on
whether to repeal the law goes before voters in November.
Despite her views, Coombs Lee had few nice words for Dr. Jack
Kevorkian, whose open defiance of Michigan's assisted-suicide
ban has stirred national debate. Kevorkian has admitted
taking part in at least 45 suicides.
"The activities of Jack Kevorkian are Exhibit A in why this
needs to be brought out from under the cover, why it has to
be openly acknowledged and openly regulated, so that society
can really have some say over what guidelines and safeguards
and procedures get followed," she said.
Dr. Timothy Quill of the University of Rochester, who has
publicly acknowledged helping terminally ill patients die as
a last resort, agreed.
"Kevorkian is defining the way-out margin. Clearly, he's a
symptom of a big problem that we have in this country, and
the middle ground is where we need to all be," Quill said.
Quill said there are some new approaches that come close to
the legal edge while ending the patient's pain, such as
sedating a person into unconsciousness. He and his allies
want to enlist the help of mainstream groups in the medical
community to create new alternatives for the dying.
"We're not talking about the absolute right to assisted
suicide," said Quill, the New York physician who challenged
his state's law. "We're talking about some obligation to find
ways to respond when suffering gets extreme, that on rare
occasions probably would include assisted suicide."
But for those opposed to assisted suicide, the court ruling
vindicates their concerns.
"Society ought not give us that much power and we ought not
arbitrarily take onto ourselves the power to intentionally
end someone's life," said Dr. Daniel Sulmasy of Georgetown
University Hospital.
While the Supreme Court resolved one legal challenge, it
opened the door to a profound ethical and moral debate that
will be argued loudly but, for now, resolved quietly between
doctors and their patients.
Correspondent Jeff Levine and The Associated Press
contributed to this report.
Related stories:
Related sites:
Note: Pages will open in a new browser window
External sites are not endorsed by CNN Interactive.
© 1997 Cable News Network, Inc.
All Rights Reserved.