"Right To Die" Bill --Madeleine Norton, 4th period

Could you imagine being sick to the point of death and being told you were "unable by law to die"? Especially considering the fact that would be in pain and desperate need for drugs? Your otherwise "self-inflicted" death would allow a less painful process than suffering alone in your final moments, which is not only harsh to think about but somewhat cruel of us as onlookers. We have the power as people of a free nation to help do far more than nothing. 

           The subject is very touchy, but at least is becoming more recognized as an issue in need of addressing. For example, California's governor, Jerry Brown signed a bill that was later passed on to the state legislature, an act considered highly controversial due to its fatally "unrestricted" intent. Jon Schuppe of NBC News states in the article below that "In a letter to lawmakers, Brown said he considered arguments from both sides, and consulted a Catholic bishop, two of his doctors, friends and former classmates. And he tried to put himself in terminal patients' place.

 'I do not know what I would do if I were dying in prolonged and excruciating pain,' Brown wrote. 'I am certain, however, that it would be a comfort to be able to consider the options afforded by this bill. And I wouldn't deny that right to others.'"

Schuppe also mentions how in this year alone over twenty-four states have tried to take into affect similar procedures, but out of all of them California has been the only state successful in it's intentions so far. States like Montana, Vermont, Washington, and Oregon have already passed bills granting patients legally prescribed deaths with life-ending drugs, making California the fifth to join their ranks. Patients can now find themselves safeguarded against forced death, and it is so insure that the patients take the medication themselves (after several doctors fill out written requests to their own approval, of course).

However, they face judgment from opponents heavily religious and those advocating the disabled who argue, “the measure legalized premature suicide, defying the will of God and putting terminally ill patients at risk of forced death.” Despite this very valid argument, supporters still refute, “The new law applied only to people who were terminally ill and were not depressed or mentally impaired.”

            I find this a very difficult matter to untangle and come to an agreement upon, because it conflicts between our ideals of what is morally right and wrong. And so, as it has been true for several different issues throughout our nation’s history, this subject and an assortment of others are highly disputable (and as often true they tend to never be resolved). I would hope that in the near future we can think of what is best for the majority and agree that something, even in this seemingly-harsh nature, must be done for the greater good. There will always be bumps and slight flaws in the plans we set out, but as long as we continue to work on this issue with the interest of others in mind, we will be steering ourselves in the right direction.

The article attached introduces the topic in further detail, and includes a video for more information: http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/terminally-ill-californians-gain-right-die-after-governor-brown-signs-n438896