Editorial 

Death-with-dignity issue gains momentum

With unintended irony the U.S. Supreme Court on Jan. 17 breathed permanent life into the death-with-dignity issue.

The land's highest court upheld Oregon's unique doctor-assisted suicide law that allows a person whose terminal illness and mental health has been confirmed by two doctors, and who undergoes a 15-day waiting period, to receive a lethal prescription of drugs.

Within days of that ruling, the death-with-dignity issue spread north. In the Washington Legislature, state Sen. Pat Thibaudeau, D-Seattle, introduced a doctor-assisted suicide bill, which unfortunately never made it out of committee. The debate would have been beneficial, and attempts to have that discussion should be renewed in Olympia next year.

Now attention to the issue has spread from Oregon southward. On March 24 the Los Angeles Times published a poignant and revealing article about this subject by Sam Howe Verhovek based on an interview with former Washington Gov. Booth Gardner. The fact that Gardner plans to introduce in Washington state an initiative supporting doctor-assisted suicide was not new. But some of the personal details in the Times story helped readers understand what a deeply personal and sensitive family matter this issue typically becomes.

Gardner was diagnosed with Parkinson's disease 13 years ago. Verhovek reported that Gardner's support of a death-with dignity law is supported by his wife and his daughter, but not his son. Doug, unlike his father a Republican, was a delegate to the 2004 Republican convention, and according to Verhovek, "says he opposes legally sanctioned suicide because society should 'err on the side of life.'"

Such political differences are common in families. Resulting conversations are difficult, but necessary, and these conversations are necessary among legislators as well.

Verhovek wrote about how this issue was not as crucial for Gardner in 1991 when a death-with-dignity initiative appeared on a Washington state ballot. The governor took no stance on the issue, and cannot even recall how he voted on it. Now, though, the issue matters, and Gardner has assumed an advocate's role. That role should be respected, even commended. And the beliefs of people who oppose doctor-assisted suicide deserve respect, too.

But one thing is certain in our state now that the Supreme Court has ruled and the momentum is spreading: It's time to talk.

>> back to top

home | search | site guide | contact us | privacy policy