Death and the Court

The legal reasoning behind the US Supreme Court's rejection of the constitutionality of an individual's right to "die with dignity" is investigated. Overviews of the plaintiffs' respective arguments & the reasoning behind the Supreme Court's decisions in Washington...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The Hastings Center report 1997-09, Vol.27 (5), p.25-29
Main Author: Capron, Alexander Morgan
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adult
Assisted suicide
Bioethics
Care and treatment
Constitutional law
Decisions
Euthanasia
Government Regulation
Humans
Intention
Judicial Decisions
Legal aspects
Life Support Systems
Medical ethics
Medical sector
Personal Autonomy
Persons
Physician and patient
Quality of Life
Right to Die
Right to Die - legislation & jurisprudence
Suicide
Suicide, Assisted - legislation & jurisprudence
Supreme court
Supreme Court Decisions
Terminally ill
Treatment Refusal - legislation & jurisprudence
United States
United States Supreme Court
Value of Life
Vulnerable Populations
Withholding Treatment
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The legal reasoning behind the US Supreme Court's rejection of the constitutionality of an individual's right to "die with dignity" is investigated. Overviews of the plaintiffs' respective arguments & the reasoning behind the Supreme Court's decisions in Washington v. Glucksberg & Vacco v. Quill are provided. Washington raised two significant issues: state involvement in quality-of-life judgments & state protection of unprotected groups from abuse & neglect. Vacco raised the issues of risks initiated by assisted suicide to important parties & of doctoral intent. Several justices have entertained further exploration of related issues, eg, legal restrictions of pain control & differences between eschewing life-support technology & physician-assisted suicide. It is concluded that the Court's decisions have permitted the public discussion of alternative end-of-life care programs & the legal fate of physician-assisted suicide. J. W. Parker
ISSN:0093-0334
1552-146X
DOI:10.2307/3527800