Pubdate: Thu, 18 Apr 2002 Source: Washington Post (DC) Copyright: 2002 The Washington Post Company Contact: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/491 Author: William Booth, Washington Post Staff Writer OREGON'S ASSISTED SUICIDES UPHELD Ashcroft Challenge Called Attempt to Usurp State Rights A federal judge in Portland ruled today that the Bush administration lacks the authority to overturn a voter-backed Oregon law permitting physician-assisted suicide. U.S. District Judge Robert Jones scolded Attorney General John D. Ashcroft, saying that the federal government was attempting to usurp the rights of a state when the Justice Department announced its intent to prosecute doctors who prescribe lethal doses of drugs to their terminally ill and dying patients. "The citizens of Oregon, through their democratic initiative process, have chosen to resolve the moral, legal and ethical debate on physician-assisted suicide for themselves by voting -- not once, but twice -- in favor of the Oregon act," Jones wrote in his order. Jones said that Ashcroft attempted to "stifle an ongoing, earnest and profound debate in the various states concerning physician-assisted suicide," and that "with no advance warning . . . fired the first shot in the battle between the state of Oregon and the federal government." Oregon is the only state to have legalized physician-assisted suicide -- an immensely controversial practice that raises ethical, medical and religious questions about the appropriate role for doctors in hastening or forbidding what advocates call "an early exit." Today's decision was a clear victory for advocates of allowing doctors to prescribe drugs to hasten an inevitable death. But this will not end the debate in the courts, in Washington and in hospital corridors. The Justice Department is considering an appeal, said Robert McCallum, an assistant attorney general. It would be heard by the 9th Circuit Court in San Francisco, and the process would likely take about 18 months. Meanwhile, the Oregon law remains in force, and other states are considering similar measures. McCallum repeated the administration's contention that "assisting suicide is not medicine." "Terminally ill patients are among the most vulnerable members of our society," he said. "Medical studies make clear that these individuals often suffer from undiagnosed depression and inadequately treated pain. A just and caring society should do its best to assist in coping with the problems that afflict the terminally ill. It should not abandon or assist in killing them." Oregon voters first approved the Death With Dignity Act in 1994, and then again three years later after a failed legal challenge. Under that law, a patient who seeks a prescription for lethal drugs must be shown to be mentally competent and must have, in the opinion of two doctors, less than six months to live. Although doctors prescribe the powerful sedatives or narcotics, they are not allowed to administer them to cause death.If the patient is incapable of taking the drugs without aid, a friend or relative may help. In the past four years, 91 people in Oregon have chosen to end their lives with the help of their physicians, according to records kept by the state. "The system has worked in Oregon," said Kathryn Tucker, one of the attorneys who defended the law in court and the director of legal affairs for the group Compassion in Dying Federation. Tucker said that the number of patients choosing suicide has been relatively low and that there have not been allegations of abuse or coercion. Opponents of physician-assisted suicide decried the court action. Burke Balch, a director of the National Right to Life Committee, said, "The American people do not want their federal government to facilitate euthanasia." Balch said he was confident the decision would be reversed on appeal. Jan LaRue, a director of the Family Research Council, said, "Medicine by definition is the art of treating and curing. Drugs are for curing, not killing." During the Clinton administration, Attorney General Janet Reno concluded that the federal government could not bar Oregon doctors from prescribing drugs to hasten death. But in November, Ashcroft ordered Drug Enforcement Administration agents to pursue cases against such doctors. Ashcroft argued that the lethal prescriptions served no "legitimate medical purpose" and violated the federal Controlled Substances Act, whose primary purpose is to regulate drugs that can be abused, from marijuana to prescription pain killers. Oregon Attorney General Hardy Myers immediately went to court and challenged the "Ashcroft directive," and Jones issued a temporary restraining order against Ashcroft in November. Today, Jones ruled again for the state, blocking the federal government from pursuing Oregon doctors. Jones said he was not required to rule on the practice of physician-assisted suicide, but a narrower point of law -- whether the federal government, through the Controlled Substances Act, can seek to bar physicians from writing prescriptions to assist in suicide. Jones concluded that the Controlled Substances Act, as well as legislative history behind the act, did not support the Ashcroft directive. The federal government, Jones wrote, is not authorized "to act as a national medical board" and regulate how physicians treat their patients. Steve Bushong, a deputy Oregon attorney general who has defended the state law, argued that Congress intended only to prevent illegal drug-trafficking by doctors under the Controlled Substances Act, and it left any decisions about medical practice up to the states. Alan Bates, a physician and a member of the Oregon Legislature, said today's ruling "allows us to continue to practice medicine without fear of losing our licenses." He warned that "once you start telling physicians how to handle their patients, you've made a huge mistake." Supporters of the Oregon law said a ruling in favor of Ashcroft could have had a chilling effect on the care of gravely ill patients because doctors might fear that prescribing too much pain medication could invite federal prosecution. McCallum, the assistant attorney general, made clear that was not the intent of the Justice Department, saying that appropriate use of pain medications was "one of the most important positive alternatives to suicide." Jones said he understood that society has not settled its mind on the question. "My task is not to criticize those who oppose the concept of assisted suicide for any reason," Jones wrote. "Many of our citizens, including the highest respected leaders of this country, oppose assisted suicide. But the fact that opposition to assisted suicide may be fully justified, morally, ethically, religiously or otherwise, does not permit a federal statute to be manipulated from its true meaning to satisfy even a worthy goal." - --- MAP posted-by: Larry Stevens