WHAT HAPPENED TO STATES' RIGHTS?

Right To Die

"It is always consoling to think of suicide," the German philosopher
Friedrich Nietzsche once wrote, "in that way one gets through many a bad
night."

Restless nights have returned to Oregon, thanks to Attorney General John
Ashcroft.

Despite more urgent matters on Ashcroft's platter these days, he has found
time to make a backdoor assault on the Oregon law that permits
doctor-assisted suicide.

In a Nov. 6 letter to the Drug Enforcement Administration, Ashcroft
declared that any doctor who prescribes lethal drugs for terminally ill
patients can face revocation of his or her license to prescribe federally
controlled drugs.

The state filed suit Nov. 7, and U.S. District Judge Robert E. Jones in
Portland temporarily blocked the federal government from enforcing
Ashcroft's order until at least Nov. 20.

I wish Oregon luck. After all, if executed criminals have the right to a
pain-free death, why shouldn't the rest of us?

As in all dilemmas, this one offers a choice between two equally unpleasant
alternatives: Allow the terminally ill to choose suicide, if they wish, or
force them to hang on in agony, too sick to live, yet not sick enough to die.

Some of us have watched a loved one endure such an exit. The thought of
prolonged suffering at the end of our lives is probably more painful for
most of us than our fear of death itself.

When there is some hope of recovery, people tend to hang on fiercely and
heroically. But when hope is gone, when the doctor says that it's just a
matter of time, some of us would rather not prolong the inevitable.

Oregon voters debated and anguished and narrowly chose the right to choose
in 1994. When legal challenges came, voters returned to the polls three
years later and reaffirmed their decision by a bigger margin, 60 percent to
40 percent.

Unlike the abortion issue, we are talking here about one's right to choose
one's own death.

Under the state's "Death With Dignity Act," a terminally ill patient may
take lethal drugs if two doctors agree the person has less than six months
to live and is mentally competent to make the decision to end his or her life.

That should ease the worry that those who want to live might be terminated
against their will by, say, greedy or impatient heirs.

And, contrary to the predictions of critics, there has not been a stampede
to the euthanasia parlors. Since Oregon's law went into effect in late
1997, only about 70 terminally ill people have chosen assisted suicide.
That averages out to less than 20 people a year.

Many more have picked up the lethal drugs from their doctors, yet died
without taking them. Many are said to have found it spiritually therapeutic
in their final days simply to know that the option of an early exit was
there, were their remaining lives to become too painful to bear.

Assisted suicide, Ashcroft said, is not a "legitimate medical purpose" for
prescribing or handing out drugs. If not, what is?

Perhaps Ashcroft thinks medical treatment is "legitimate" only if it is
intended to cure, not to comfort. Maybe he thinks medicine is not also
legitimate when it eases pain and discomfort, even among those whose
conditions are terminal.

Oregon's doctor-assisted suicide law is about as reasonable as such a law
can be, but not reasonable enough for Ashcroft. Unable to overturn the law
outright, Ashcroft took a backdoor route to block the expressed will of the
state's voters. In the words of Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden, Aschcroft
"tossed the ballots of Oregon voters in the trash can."

How ironic. As a candidate, George W. Bush railed on the presidential
campaign trail against Washington's intrusions in matters that should best
be left up to the states. Now that Bush is in the White House, he stands
back while his attorney general similarly intrudes.

Despite his lofty legal arguments, Ashcroft appears to be using the law
only to enforce his personal faith and moral convictions. All of us
Americans should defend his right to hold onto his beliefs. But the
Constitution is supposed to prevent him from imposing his beliefs on us.

Ashcroft's agents have enough on their hands these days trying to track
down terrorists. They don't need to be trying to second-guess doctors on
how many painkillers they should give out.