Pubdate: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 Source: Register-Guard, The (OR) Copyright: 2001 The Register-Guard Contact: http://www.registerguard.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/362 Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/ashcroft.htm (Ashcroft, John) REPRIEVE FOR SUICIDE LAW: LETHAL PRESCRIPTIONS CONTINUE PENDING TRIAL Given U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft's proven eagerness to curb civil liberties, his decision to trump the twice-stated will of Oregon voters by denying the terminally ill the right to end their lives with dignity should have surprised absolutely no one. Still, Ashcroft's move earlier this month to overturn Oregon's landmark assisted suicide law was breathtaking in its timing, scope and arrogance. That the attorney general - in the midst of a national crisis during which he should be fully immersed in protecting this nation against biological weapons, nuclear attacks and other acts of terrorism - found the time to impose his own ideological views on the state of Oregon remains nothing less than astounding. It was heartening to learn this week that U.S. District Judge Robert E. Jones extended for five months a restraining order that blocks Ashcroft's order to revoke the licenses of Oregon physicians who prescribe lethal doses of drugs to terminally ill patients. For the time being, Oregon will remain the only state where people are allowed to end their lives using prescribed drugs if they have taken the steps required under the state's Death with Dignity Act - having two doctors agree that they have less than six months to live and are mentally competent. Oregon Attorney General Hardy Myers made a convincing argument that Ashcroft illegally reached his decision in a secretive process, allowing no public scrutiny or comment before issuing his edict. He overstepped his authority by having the federal government decide how doctors can practice medicine, a responsibility that belongs to the states. He ignored the fact that Janet Reno, his predecessor under the Clinton administration, had already set the limits of federal power in interpreting the federal Controlled Substances Act. Justice Department attorneys argued that Oregon does not have the right to allow patients to obtain lethal drugs under the Controlled Substances Act. That overlooks Reno's previous interpretation, as well as the reality that the federal act was intended to prevent illegal drug trafficking when it was passed three decades ago, not to interfere with states' abilities to regulate the practice of medicine. When the case comes to trial early next year, Ashcroft will have a hard time making the case for this heavy-handed, ideologically driven attempt to interject the federal government into the life-and-death decisions of terminally ill Oregonians. It will be fascinating to watch government lawyers explain why the federal government has the right to subject physicians and patients in Oregon to the same charade that exists in other states - of prescribing high doses of pain medications to hide intentions that are obvious to everyone. It will also be interesting to see how Justice Department attorneys counter the moving statements made by terminally ill Oregonians who have joined the state in its lawsuit. They include 68-year-old Karl Stansell, who has terminal throat cancer, has received chemotherapy and radiation therapy, and is being fed through a tube. His doctors have informed him he has less than six months to live as the cancer spreads through his body. "Eventually I will be unable to swallow anything and will die in agony," Stansell said in a statement filed with the court. Your response, Mr. Ashcroft. - --- MAP posted-by: Doc-Hawk