Montana has become the third U.S. state to legalize physician-assisted suicide. The law will apply only to mentally competent, terminally ill patients.
But some advocates believe it should also apply to the mentally ill, a practice that has been legal in Switzerland since 2007.
Jacob Appel, a professor at Brown University, wrote in the May-June 2007 issue of The Hastings Center Report that logically, the same principles that apply to terminally ill patients also apply to those with repeated bouts of severe depression.
Appel believes arguments against the practice are well-meaning, but misplaced, and that Switzerland’s law may help break down the “longstanding taboo.”
Appel suggested that liberalized laws in several Western nations - and now three U.S. states - make it reasonable to question policies that “universally deny such a basic opportunity to the mentally ill.”
Bioethics specialist Wesley Smith wrote in July 2007 that he saw a natural trajectory "from the terminally ill, to the disabled and chronically ill, to the 'tired of life' elderly, and eventually to the mentally ill.”
In the Swiss Federal Supreme Court decision, Nov. 3, 2006, the court ruled in favor of a 53-year-old man with bipolar disorder who sought a lethal dose of medication to end his own life. The court cleared the way, deciding that individuals with severe, long-term mental illness can make a “rational” and “well-considered” decision to commit suicide.
In Montana, with the newest law, Dr. George Mulcaire-Jones is concerned about the trend.
Dr. Mulcaire-Jones contends that "good physicians treat suicidal depression, regardless of the prognosis of physical illnesses the patient might have as well. Patients need competent, compassionate care, not legalized lethal drug overdoses."
The Montana case is Baxter v. Montana, 09-0051, Supreme Court of Montana (Helena).
Oregon was the first state to legalize assisted suicide, in 1997.
Basic opportunity? Self-determination? Promotion of a permanent solution to a temporary problem? For further information, pro and con:












Comments