Doctor-Assisted Suicide Gets OK in Montana

(AP)  The Montana Supreme Court said Thursday that nothing in state law prevents patients from seeking physician-assisted suicide, making Montana the third U.S. state that will allow the procedure.

Patients and doctors had been waiting for the state's high court to step in after a lower court decided a year ago that constitutional rights to privacy and dignity protect the right to die.

The Montana Supreme Court opinion will now give doctors in the state the freedom to prescribe the necessary drugs to mentally competent, terminally ill patients without fear of being prosecuted, advocates said.

Steve Johnson, a 72-year-old Helena cancer patient, welcomed the decision, saying he has talked with his doctor about ending his life.

"I am very concerned about the intense pain and loss of dignity," the lifelong rancher and veterinarian said at a press conference at the Capitol. "I've accepted my death. I approach the end of my life with a clear mind."

The Supreme Court didn't go as far as District Judge Dorothy McCarter of Helena did last December when she extended constitutional protections to the procedure.

The Supreme Court decided not to determine whether the Montana Constitution guarantees the right. Instead, it said nothing in state law or the court's precedent indicated it was against public policy — and pointed to laws giving patients rights to make crucial decisions as a justification for legalizing the assistance.

Oregon and Washington state allow assisted suicides for terminally ill patients, with Oregon adopting America's first "death with dignity" law in 1997. Tucker said Montana doctors should now feel comfortable adopting procedures that doctors in the other two states use.

The Supreme Court ruled that assisted suicide is an acceptable defense to any homicide charges against the doctor.

"In physician aid in dying, the patient, not the physician, commits the final death-causing act by self-administering a lethal dose of medicine," Justice William Leaphart wrote for the court.

[troutfishyman]

kuddos to Montana!

This should be an essential right of any person, to die at the time of your choosing. It is ironic that those on the right constantly use the word "freedom", but they are opposed to so many things like this that are really the essence of freedom.

[ginagagnon]

Our law states plainly that the physician does not administer the dosage - he gives the medications to the patient themselves, and then the patient decides when to take the medications. What is the matter with people. We humanely treat our animals better than we do our elderly, sick and dying. I know lots of people here in Montana that would willingly shoot themselves rather than die in a cold hospital with tubes in them. I am one of those. My life impacts no one.

[kippertoo]

I recently had to put one of my dogs down after he put up a tough fight against bone cancer. When the meds, pain patches and acupuncture failed to control his pain it was in his best interest to end his life. If only my mother had been able to make that decision for herself she woould not have had to lay in a nursing home bed for a year systematically starving herself to death. She refused a feeding tube and had a DNR order and when she had gotten herself down to 67 pounds her body finally shut down and she passed away. She was dying but had all of her faculties throughout and, if she had been given the chance, would certainly have preferred death by another method other than self-induced starvation. Thank you Montana for giving folks the opportunity to make their own choices when the time comes. They are parents, grandparents, brothers and sisters, and deserve to be treated with dignity in their final days.

[ginagagnon]

I for one am pleased that my state Montana - is brave enough to offer this alternative to living tied up with tubes and in pain and suffering because of a disease no one has a cure for. Far better to end it than live with the knowledge you are a burdon on your family and your families finances. Especially in this day and age. Are you going to suffer personally if I have cancer and choose to end my life? Or are you going to pay for my hospital bills? By ending my life legally, I end my suffering and pain, and put an end to eternal billing cycles.

[ss433]

If I have a terminal illness, when I die I want my family and friends to be there to say goodbye.

[ss433]

Great. You get a nice view of Montana's beautiful mountains before you go.

[ss433]

Better than to leave someone essentially rotting while they're still alive in a "cold and heartless hospital room".

[ss433]

Assisted suicide is nothing new. It's been around forever. All the stuff about, "oh, this wasn't around when I was growing up" is nonsense. Sure it may have been more or less common at certain times in certain places and cultures, but it's always been.

[armyoftwelve]

This makes me glad I don't live in Montana.

If I was going to choose a doctor, I would want to make DAMN sure he never snuffed out someone who was terminally ill!

I you want to kill yourself, no one can stop you--but the burden of the killing should fall SOLELY ON YOU! You don't need to pervert OUR
collective medical system from caring to killing.

[AttentionDeficit]

army: do you not see any scenario where helping a person end their life to be compassionate?

[slownewsday___]

army doesn't like anything except his Bible.

[alclar]

Kudos to Montana! "Quality" of life as determined by patient and doctor should always trump a meager, pathetic existence of life. If you don't want assisted suicide - don't opt for it, but don't try to eliminate it for people like I.

[staycalm]

I hope everyone here realizes the magnitude of the change in this country's thinking about death. I am 55 and when I was in middle school everyone considered abortion to be murder. As recently as 10 years ago everyone considered physician assisted suicide to be murder. It is amazing how quickly everyone has changed their mind about something as fundamental as taking a human life. Why has this happened? I would assume it's because no one believes in God anymore. After all, if you believe in God, you cannot countenance allowing human beings participate in the taking of a human life for that is something that throughout history has only been the purview of God. Many baby boomers, like myself, are realizing the pain associated with aging and death and want to be abe to have a quick exit in place if it becomes unbearable. Abortion has long been a case of placing a woman's convenience ahead of a child's right to life so I guess it was just a matter of time for the slope to slip a little further. If this is what people really want, then that is what shall be in the land of the free but don't try to call ourselves Christian or Jewish or any faith that purports to believe in a higher power for we have become a soft people that only believes in oursleves.

[AttentionDeficit]

staycalm: if you, as a Christian, want to suffer to please your god, then have at it. keep it out of the laws of the state or nation. do you countenance war? if not, your position would seem to be weakened

[AttentionDeficit]

i mean if you do support war, the position would seem to have been weakened

[guest173]

I hope the judge did a little more research than just say "nothing says we can't do it," since murder could be what it is considered if not careful. I do hope any healthcare worker involved in this is really doing the right thing, and not abusing it, which I'm sure for the most part they are in their heart really trying to help a dying person not suffer, we just need to make sure not to cross a line, many criminals cross that line every day so we need to be careful when dealing with life and death issues

[CaboSailor]

A terminally ill patient had two choices. Tough it out at a cost of great pain and suffering, not only for themselves but their family. Or they could try to opt out on their own. If you opt out on your own and botch the job, then multiply pain, suffering, etc. by a couple of orders of magnitude. I personally applaud this decision and would welcome the option if it becomes necessary.