Comments on: The Supremes and physician assisted suicide http://www.medrants.com/archives/2537 Contemplating medicine and the health care system Tue, 16 Mar 2010 14:53:42 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Angel http://www.medrants.com/archives/2537/comment-page-1#comment-96966 Angel Tue, 29 Nov 2005 21:29:06 +0000 http://medrants.com/?p=2537#comment-96966 Is there hard evidence that a "slipper slope" has occurred or is occuring in the state of Oregon? What abuses would come about if PAS is legalized? A physician killing patients? I strongly doubt it since PAS is what it is...suicide with the assistance of a physician. In other words, a physician will only provide the patient (requester) with the tool so that they'll use it along to terminate their own life. My understand of suicide is termination of one's own life meaning that no one else played a role in that person's suicide. Suicide is the action of one person and one person only. Say for instance, if someone provides me with a gun, and I use that gun to blow my brains out, does that mean that the person who provided the gun killed me? Same concept applies to PAS. Again, is there concret evidence that a "slipper slope" has occurred or will occur? Thanks. Is there hard evidence that a “slipper slope” has occurred or is occuring in the state of Oregon? What abuses would come about if PAS is legalized? A physician killing patients? I strongly doubt it since PAS is what it is…suicide with the assistance of a physician. In other words, a physician will only provide the patient (requester) with the tool so that they’ll use it along to terminate their own life. My understand of suicide is termination of one’s own life meaning that no one else played a role in that person’s suicide. Suicide is the action of one person and one person only. Say for instance, if someone provides me with a gun, and I use that gun to blow my brains out, does that mean that the person who provided the gun killed me? Same concept applies to PAS. Again, is there concret evidence that a “slipper slope” has occurred or will occur? Thanks.

]]> By: Alice http://www.medrants.com/archives/2537/comment-page-1#comment-76515 Alice Wed, 12 Oct 2005 00:40:52 +0000 http://medrants.com/?p=2537#comment-76515 I'll agree to support states' rights for Oregon, if those judges can reason far enough to then apply that same standard to states' anti-abortion laws. Surely if one state can decide to kill its elderly, another state can decide not to kill its babies. And maybe if this were permitted, it would promote a more civil society. People who like euthanasia can move to Oregon, and people who don't like abortion can move to Kansas. I’ll agree to support states’ rights for Oregon, if those judges can reason far enough to then apply that same standard to states’ anti-abortion laws. Surely if one state can decide to kill its elderly, another state can decide not to kill its babies. And maybe if this were permitted, it would promote a more civil society. People who like euthanasia can move to Oregon, and people who don’t like abortion can move to Kansas.

]]> By: Laurie http://www.medrants.com/archives/2537/comment-page-1#comment-73629 Laurie Thu, 06 Oct 2005 02:37:03 +0000 http://medrants.com/?p=2537#comment-73629 We've been talking about this in the office. I wonder if you agree that this has an effect on the "off label" use of medications. If the question is 'can narcotic prescriptions be used to assist a hastened death?' which is clearly an "off label," use for narcotics and the answer is "no, they can't be Rx'd that way," then will this decision open a can of worms that requires drug companies to submit for FDA approval for all current off label uses for their drugs? This will really bog the system down and open prescribers’ to suit for any off label prescriptions. Laurie Anderson, RNP We’ve been talking about this in the office. I wonder if you agree that this has an effect on the “off label” use of medications. If the question is ‘can narcotic prescriptions be used to assist a hastened death?’ which is clearly an “off label,” use for narcotics and the answer is “no, they can’t be Rx’d that way,” then will this decision open a can of worms that requires drug companies to submit for FDA approval for all current off label uses for their drugs? This will really bog the system down and open prescribers’ to suit for any off label prescriptions.

Laurie Anderson, RNP

]]> By: Japhy http://www.medrants.com/archives/2537/comment-page-1#comment-73555 Japhy Thu, 06 Oct 2005 00:51:05 +0000 http://medrants.com/?p=2537#comment-73555 i thought i'd comment since i attended oral arguments this morning. o'connor seemed very skeptical of the ag's ability to regulate medicine in this manner. she asked several hard nosed questions comparing pas and doctor's involvement with state-sanctioned killing of inmates. ginsburg was also very dismissive of the feds argument. that being said, what will be interesting is to see when o'connor is actually replaced. if she is not replaced before the opinion is written, she will get to vote. if that happens, i think the law will be upheld. also, i am curious to understand more about your moral objections to oregon's law. is it that physicians should only heal patients, not harm them? i ask because, the oregon law was very well crafted to prevent much of the abuses that so concerned people (regarding euthanasia, and discrimination of minorities or those of low ses). regardless, the argument this morning was very well done by both oregon and the solicitor general. i thought i’d comment since i attended oral arguments this morning. o’connor seemed very skeptical of the ag’s ability to regulate medicine in this manner. she asked several hard nosed questions comparing pas and doctor’s involvement with state-sanctioned killing of inmates. ginsburg was also very dismissive of the feds argument. that being said, what will be interesting is to see when o’connor is actually replaced. if she is not replaced before the opinion is written, she will get to vote. if that happens, i think the law will be upheld.

also, i am curious to understand more about your moral objections to oregon’s law. is it that physicians should only heal patients, not harm them? i ask because, the oregon law was very well crafted to prevent much of the abuses that so concerned people (regarding euthanasia, and discrimination of minorities or those of low ses).

regardless, the argument this morning was very well done by both oregon and the solicitor general.

]]> By: james gaulte http://www.medrants.com/archives/2537/comment-page-1#comment-73509 james gaulte Thu, 06 Oct 2005 00:00:59 +0000 http://medrants.com/?p=2537#comment-73509 I had planned to post on this topic and planned to say exactly what you said.No need now. I'll just agree with you. I had planned to post on this topic and planned to say exactly what you said.No need now. I’ll just agree with you.

]]>