Dopplr Legal News and Information

California Assisted Suicide Law Gets Final Approval: Right To Die

B. ClausenB. Clausen

It’s known as end-of-life option, right-to-die, assisted suicide, and it has been a very controversial topic nationwide since Oregon became the first to enact such a law in 1997. California, after being signed into approval by Gov. Jerry Brown in October of 2015, had their own version come into effect on June 9th of this year. It received final approval two days ago, when Riverside County Superior Court Judge Daniel A. Ottolia denied a request to suspend the End of Life Option Act (ELOA).

Moral issues such as these are difficult to assess in a law aspect, but for those who suffer from a terminal disease, it’s important to them to be able to decide on their own terms when their life should end. A woman with Stage 4 colon cancer said she, “cried with relief” when the judge denied the motion to suspend the new law. No one wants to suffer through excruciating pain, nor do they want to force their family to watch them do so. However, California is just the fifth state – along with Oregon, Washington, Vermont and Montana (by court ruling) – to enact a right-to-die law; in fact, 38 states have laws which specifically state that a physician or doctor who assists in suicide is guilty of manslaughter. It’s clear that this issue will continue to be debated for a long time.

What do Opponents to california’s right-to-die law say?

There are many arguments on both sides of this issue, and those who are in opposition – the Life Legal Defense Foundation and the American Academy of Medical Ethics, to name a few – to the law make mostly relevant points. Addressing them one by one, we’ll juxtapose the arguments against what California’s new law actually says.

How trustworthy and unbiased a “law” organization such as the Life Legal Defense Foundation is certainly up for debate, and their rhetoric in opposition to the ELOA does not appear to have a lot of merit. One thing is for certain: we cannot possibly understand fully what the thought process is of someone with a terminal disease. What works for someone else may not work for us, but if someone wants the option to not go through extreme pain and suffering, or force their family and friends to watch them go through it, then they should have it.

Legally speaking, there is nothing in our federal laws or Constitution prohibiting this freedom of choice. Given the proper protocol that prevents any coercion or gaming of the system, which California’s End of Life Option Act certainly appears to have covered, then those suffering greatly should be allowed to decide when their life ends, rather than allowing the disease to decide for them.

B. Clausen
Author

A graduate of the University of Kansas, Brian Clausen is the U.S. news reporter for Dopplr. Before joining the team, he created digital content for large companies.

Comments 1
  • Catness
    Posted on

    Catness Catness

    Reply Author

    WTF unbelievable, our loved one was euthanized without her or our consent this was in 2010 in California. I can only imagine what will happen with this law in place. It just totally sickens me.


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.