US Supreme Court rules in favor of choice at the end of life.

Jan 18 03:19 UTC 2006

 01.17.05: Supreme Court Ruling A Defining Moment for Aid-in-Dying Law

The US Supreme Court ruled today in favor of choice at the end of life. In
a 6 to 3 decision, the court ruled the Attorney Generals attempt to intervene
in affairs of the states aid-in-dying law has exceeded his authority.

This is a watershed decision for freedom and democracy in the U.S., says
Barbara Coombs Lee, Co-CEO and president of Compassion & Choices. It reaffirms
the liberty, dignity and privacy Americans cherish at the end of life.

No government should threaten these rights nor usurp a states power to meet
the needs of its dying citizens, she says.

For now Oregons aid-in-dying law is safe. But Compassion & Choices efforts
have just begun. We will defend any Congressional attack on the Oregon law
while aggressively pursuing similar legislation throughout the nation. Please
join us in our Compassion For A Nation campaign, an effort to ensure that
every citizen in the Union is has the same freedoms Oregonians enjoy.

We will not stop until all Americans can live and die as free people, in
dignity and according to their own values.

(from http://www.compassionandchoices.org/news/index.php)

response 2 of 74:

Jan 18 08:22 UTC 2006

As much as I agree with the right to die, I think Kevorkian was pressing
his luck.  He started to see the issue (or maybe himself) as more
important than the people he was helping.  At least it appeared that
way, sometimes.

response 4 of 74:

Jan 18 13:39 UTC 2006

I'll be happy to uphold your wish to die a painful death in a puddle of
your own urine, KLG.

response 6 of 74:

Jan 18 15:34 UTC 2006

People with physical and mental disabilities are not threatened by this
ruling, *unless* they themselves decide that they would like to die
comfortably when they have only months to live. KLG has clearly not read the
law. Some sections are:

"(1) An adult who is capable, is a resident of Oregon, and has been determined
by the attending physician and consulting physician to be suffering from a
terminal disease, and who has voluntarily expressed his or her wish to die,
may make a written request for medication for the purpose of ending his or
her life in a humane and dignified manner in accordance with ORS 127.800 to
127.897."

and

"(12) "Terminal disease" means an incurable and irreversible disease that has
been medically confirmed and will, within reasonable medical judgment, produce
death within six months. [1995 c.3 s.1.01; 1999 c.423 s.1]"

response 8 of 74:

Jan 18 17:29 UTC 2006

Reputable reports from other countries show that the "protections" 
contained in the law are far from perfect in their application.

vanheyningen has a point.  But another contradiction is that the same 
court ruled against state laws allowing medical marijuana use.  Splain 
that one.

response 10 of 74:

Jan 18 18:13 UTC 2006

The stats since the law was enacted in Oregon showed that over 95% of the
witting participants were affluent white men.  Out of the 10,000 or so
terminally and painfully ill, only about 200 opted in.  They had the pro's
and cons presented to them by at least 2 doctors and were well informed.
In some cases, even after the patients were granted the prescriptions..they
opted not to use them.

I don't see the point of raising boogeymen arguments about mentally ill being
issued a prescription for death by 2 competent doctors after extensive
counselling.  This is about freedom of choice for individuals that are on a
one way course to die painfully.  I guess folks would rather see a Hemingway
where the victim has to drink themself silly and swallow a shotgun?

response 12 of 74:

Jan 18 18:18 UTC 2006

The mistake Kevorkian made was videotaping the events.  They never would have
had anything on him otherwise because he did what alot of other doctors are
willing to do discreetly.  The prosecution was able to use the videotapes to
make Kevorkian look like a serial killer willing to forego extensive analysis
of alternatives to the patient.  It also didn't help that he dropped off
bodies at the hospital like a dog taking a dump rather than just leaving the
body in their home and calling 911 to send out the county coroner.

response 14 of 74:

Jan 18 18:25 UTC 2006

Kevorkian videotaped what he was doing because he did not believe what he was
doing was wrong.  He wanted to be put on trial so he could make his case. 
If he dies in jail, he becomes a martyr for his cause.  Which may be what he
really wants.  

response 16 of 74:

Jan 18 18:56 UTC 2006

I don't think he was a media whore, but he was hamstrung by his own
arrogance in his beliefs.  I don't think he believed that he'd be
prosecuted, or perhaps he felt that a jury would acquit him again.

response 18 of 74:

Jan 18 19:19 UTC 2006

Maybe it was his association with Fieger, who is nothing *but* a media 
whore.

response 20 of 74:

Jan 18 20:19 UTC 2006

Dr Death is just a nut case.  Gazing into the eyes of people as they 
died??  He was too dangerous to be a doctor on the loose.

response 22 of 74:

Jan 18 23:47 UTC 2006

I find it interesting that the Macomb County Sheriff got less time for raping
his secretary than Kevorkian got for assisting a suicide.  VERY interesting.
And to boot, the sheriff's SON got his old job..and right after election
results came out..they showed him celebrating at campaign headquarters with
jailbait girls running around drunk holding beers...right there on channel
4 and 7.  Blew my mind but spoke volumes about doubletalking rightwingers who
want max penalties for Kevorkian for snubbing the fascist pharmaceutical laws.

response 24 of 74:

Jan 19 00:20 UTC 2006

<snickers behind dumpster with Sandy Levin>