Annotated Legal Cases on Physician-Assisted Suicide in the USA
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
www.rbs2.com/pas.pdf 29 Jul 2012 Page 1 of 124 Annotated Legal Cases on Physician-Assisted Suicide in the USA Copyright 2005, 2012 by Ronald B. Standler no claim of copyright for works of the U.S. Government no claim of copyright for text of judicial opinions or other quotations Keywords assisted, assisting, Baxter, compassion, case, cases, death, die, Donaldson, dying, euthanasia, Glucksberg, Kevorkian, law, laws, legal, life, McIver, mercy killing, Oregon, physician, physician-assisted suicide, Quill, Sanderson, suicide, United States, U.S., U.S.A., Vacco Table of Contents Introduction . 3 definitions . 4 disclaimer . 5 Patients Who Want to Die . 6 reason we need physician-assisted suicide . 9 “It’s Over, Debbie” . 10 Suicide Was a Crime . 12 Assisting a Suicide Is a Crime . 13 statutes . 13 case law . 15 my comments . 17 possibility of criminal prosecution of physicians . 18 cases involving physicians . 20 cases involving nonphysicians . 22 consent of victim is not a defense . 24 Donaldson (Cal.App. 1992) . 27 Washington State v. Glucksberg (1994-97) . 31 en banc opinion of U.S. Court of Appeals . 32 six state interests . 39 1. preserving life . 40 www.rbs2.com/pas.pdf 29 Jul 2012 Page 2 of 124 2. preventing suicide . 42 3. preventing undue influence . 44 4. preventing injury to innocent third-parties . 45 5. protecting integrity of medical profession . 45 6. fear of adverse consequences . 46 the en banc majority opinion continues .... 46 U.S. Supreme Court . 48 Quill v. Vacco (1994-1997) . 65 U.S. Court of Appeals . 66 my comments on Quill . 70 Calabresi’s concurring opinion . 71 U.S. Supreme Court . 76 Kevorkian (Mich. 1993-2002) . 80 Krischer v. McIver (Fla. 1997) . 82 Sanderson v. Colorado (2000) . 84 my comments . 87 Oregon “Death With Dignity” Statute (1995-2006) . 90 laboratory of the states . 94 Ashcroft’s Regulation rejected . 95 Washington (2009) . 97 Montana (2009) . 98 Religious Origins . 102 Does Government “own” our lives? . 107 four state interests . 108 medieval law . 108 Is “Quality of Life” Relevant? . 110 my opinion on “quality of life” . 112 My Opinion . 113 suggested statute . 116 Views of Physicians . 117 www.rbs2.com/pas.pdf 29 Jul 2012 Page 3 of 124 Executions of Criminals . 120 Eighth Amendment . 121 Conclusion . 123 Introduction This essay contains annotated quotations from the major reported cases in the USA on the alleged legal right of an adult patient with a terminal illness to receive a lethal dose of drugs from his/her physician. I list the cases in chronological order in this essay, so the reader can easily follow the historical development of a national phenomenon. I have an earlier collection of annotated court cases on the legal right of a mentally competent adult to refuse medical care, even if that refusal would cause the patient’s death — the so-called right-to-die — which is posted on the Internet at http://www.rbs2.com/rtd.pdf . That essay includes a discussion of seven cases: 1. Matter of Quinlan, 355 A.2d 647 (N.J. 1976). 2. Eichner v. Dillon, 426 N.Y.S.2d 517 (N.Y.A.D. 2 Dept. 1980), mod. sub nom. Matter of Storar, 420 N.E.2d 64, 438 N.Y.S.2d 266 (N.Y. 1981) (case of Brother Fox). 3. Matter of Welfare of Colyer, 660 P.2d 738 (Wash. 1983). 4. Matter of Conroy, 486 A.2d 1209 (N.J. 1985). 5. Bouvia v. Superior Court, 225 Cal.Rptr. 297 (Cal.App. 2 Dist. 1986). 6. Cruzan v. Harmon 760 S.W.2d 408 (Mo. 1988), aff’d, 497 U.S. 261 (1990). 7. Matter of Theresa Schiavo in Florida state courts and U.S. federal courts. The problem of withdrawal of life-support machinery (e.g., ventilator or feeding tube) from patients in a persistent vegetative state was solved in a series of cases, beginning with Quinlan and ending with Cruzan. Furthermore, courts have had no difficulty in allowing conscious adult quadriplegics to refuse food or to request disconnection of their ventilator, see Bouvia and similar cases cited in my right-to-die essay. In contrast with the “right-to-die” cases in the previous paragraph, this essay considers physician-assisted suicide, where the physician either (1) prescribes a lethal dose of medication, knowing that the patient will use that medication to commit suicide, or (2) personally administers a lethal dose of medication. www.rbs2.com/pas.pdf 29 Jul 2012 Page 4 of 124 I am interested in this subject for two different reasons. First, I am interested in constitutional privacy law,1 which sets limits on the power of governments to intrude in personal choices and Second, I am interested in the relationship between technology and change in the law. Prior to the 1960s, people tended to die quickly. Modern medical technology can prolong life, even when the quality of life (according to the affected individual) is not worth living. People with a terminal illness can suffer great pain during the last year of their life, have no reasonable hope of recovery, and consume large amounts of money in health-care expenses. The legal and religious rules that worked well prior to the 1960s are suddenly not only inadequate, but also harsh and cruel. This essay is difficult to organize, because there are a number of different issues involved in why assisted suicide is currently a felony in most states in the USA, and there are more issues involved in why physician-assisted suicide should be lawful. I begin by explaining why some mentally competent people want to die. Beginning at page 13, I list the state statutes that prohibit assisted suicide. I then list some of the court cases that apply these statutes, and explain why consent of the victim is not a defense to the crime of assisting a suicide. The bulk of this essay is quotations from, and a discussion of, various court cases in which plaintiffs have sought the judicial declaration of a new legal right for physician-assisted suicide. I have arranged these cases in approximately historical order, so readers can follow the historical development of the law in this area. As discussed beginning at page 31 below, federal courts in Washington state (i.e., Glucksberg) and in New York state (i.e., Quill) found a legal right in the U.S. Constitution to physician-assisted suicide,.