Physician Assisted Suicide a Constitutional Right?
Physician Assisted Suicide a Constitutional Right?
Kathleen McGowan
Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/tcl Part of the Constitutional Law Commons Recommended Citation
KATHLEEN McGowAN"
No man is an Hand, intire of it selfe;
every man is a peece of the Continent,
apartof the maine;
... any mans death diminishes me,
because I am involved in Mankinde ... '
Modern medical technology allows Americans to live longer,
healthier lives.2 Cures for diseases once considered terminal are
now commonplace.3 Many other lives are extended by means of
medicine, operations, organ transplants, and highly technical
machines.4 At the same time, however, these advances present
moral, ethical, and legal dilemmas where prolonging life seems
only to increase a person's pain and lengthen the dying process.5
When infirmities are incurable and the person can be
maintained solely in a debilitated condition, he may face a choice of
whether to prolong the dying process.6 The question thus arises
. J.D. Candidate, 1998, St. John's University School of Law. Dedicated to my
son, John, who taught me the value of life.
' John Donne, Devotions XVII, in THE COMPLETE POETRY AND SELECTED PROSE
OF JOHN DONNE & THE COMPLETE POETRY OF WILLIAM BLAKE 331 (John Hayward,
ed., Random House (1941)).
2 See Developments in the Law-Medical Technology and the Law, 103 HARV. L.
REV. 1519, 1522 (1990) [hereinafter Developments].
Id. at 1523.
Id. at 1522 n.1
See G. Steven Neeley, The Right to Self-Directed Death:ReconsideringAn
Ancient Proscription,36 CATH. LAw. 111 (1995).
6 "[Mlost people cannot accept and plan for the fact of their own death." JESSE
DUKEMINIER & STANLEY M. JOHANSON, WILLS, TRUSTS, AND ESTATES 67 (5th ed.
whether a competent individual has rights and options
concerning decisions affecting his medical treatment and ultimately his
death.7 The attitudes of family, religion, and society influence
that decision-making process and our laws.8
Recently, the Supreme Court of the United States granted
certiorari and heard oral arguments9 in two cases involving the
rights of terminally ill' ° competent adults" who wish to end their
1995). "Our own death is indeed unimaginable, and whenever we make the attempt
to imagine it we can perceive that we really survive as spectators. Hence ... at
bottom no one believes in his own death...." Id. (quoting Sigmund Freud, OurAttitude
Towards Death, in 4 COLLECTED PAPERS 304 (1925)).
7 A patient has the right to be informed about his medical condition and his
lives with the assistance of a physician.
In
Washington v.
Glucksberg, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit,"
and Vacco v. Quill, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second
Circuit,"3 held, respectively, that the laws of the states of
Washington 4 and New York 5 prohibiting one person from aiding another
to commit suicide violated rights guaranteed by the United
States Constitution. Each court held that terminally ill patients
have the right to physician assisted suicide but reached their
conclusions on separate Constitutional grounds."
The Ninth Circuit en banc, in Washington v. Glucksberg,7
held that a terminally ill, competent adult has a constitutionally
guaranteed, "liberty interest in determining the time and
manner of one's own death." 8 The Washington statute prohibiting
assisted suicide, therefore, violated the Substantive Due Process
a set of personal values and goals, the ability to communicate with others and to
understand information provided by others, and the capacity to reason and
deliberate about the decision." Developments, supra note 2, at 1644 n.10.
Compassion in Dying v. Washington, 79 F.3d 790 (9th Cir. 1996), cert. granted
sub nom., Washington v. Glucksberg, 117 S.Ct. 37 (U.S. October 1, 1996) (No.
96110). The plaintiffs are a coalition of three terminally ill patients, four physicians
who treat terminally ill patients, and a non-profit organization that provides
counseling, support, and assistance to terminally ill patients considering suicide. Id. at
794. Since the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari to this case under
the name Washington v. Glucksberg, this Comment hereinafter refers to the case as
Glucksberg rather than Compassion in Dying.
Quill v. Vacco, 80 F.3d 716 (2d Cir.), cert. granted, 117 S.Ct. 36 (U.S. Oct. 1,
1996) (No. 95 - 1858). Since the Supreme Court of the United States granted
certiorari under the name Vacco v. Quill, this Comment herinafter will refer to the case
as Vacco v. Quill or Quill.
" "A person is guilty of promoting a suicide attempt when he knowingly causes
or aides another person to attempt suicide." WASH. REV. CODE § 9A.36.060 (1987).
" "A person is guilty of promoting a suicide attempt when he intentionally
causes or aids another person to attempt suicide." N.Y. PENAL LAW § 120.30
(McKinney 1987). "A person is guilty of manslaughter in the second degree when: ...
[hie intentionally causes or aids another person to commit su (...truncated)