What Congress Should Really Be Asking Alito About

By Tom D'Antoni, The Huffington Post, Dec. 13, 2005

As usual, when discussing the merits of Judge Samuel A. Alito, Jr., both liberals and conservatives are spending most of their time re-re-re-debating the abortion issue and how he will or will not deal with it. They're each missing several other issues, but one thing they're both ignoring has folks of a certain age in Oregon holding their breaths, and it's something that should concern everyone.

It's the Bush challenge to the Oregon Death With Dignity Law.

That law allows the terminally ill, after a rigorous process, to be prescribed a lethal dose of drugs (usually Nembutal) by a physician. The patient may then end his life when, where and in the company of whom he chooses.

The Oregon experience with that law has disproved all of the dire predictions that the (mostly religious-based) opponents made before the law was first enacted. I have interviewed many of the major opponents to the law and the only person to freely admit that his opposition was based on his faith was U.S. Sen. Gordon Smith (R-Oregon).

The law was passed by the Oregon Legislature and then by the voters in two ballot initiatives. The results of last vote in 1997 found Oregonians voting 666,275 to 445,830 to keep the law on the books.

It's easy to talk academically, medically, theologically or philosophically about the issue, but when I think about it I see, in my mind's eye, a bedroom in North Portland on May 3, 2003.

For my collaborator, Greg Bond and I, it was the end of shooting on a documentary we had been producing for twenty-three months, "Robert's Story: Dying With Dignity." It tells the story of the struggle of Robert Schwartz, fifty-two years old and terminally ill who had the medication, prescribed legally under the law. The struggle was with the decision when to end his life.

His family and friends gathered that day, and after a back porch communion service, Robert and his partner, his pastor, a representative from Compassion In Dying of Oregon, his mom and dad, brother and cousins participated his death in the most loving way possible.

I said my goodbyes, sat at his bedside and promised I would tell his story, and do right by him. After an anointing service, he drank the liquid Nembutal and went into a coma shortly thereafter, but not before his final act, which was to comfort his crying partner.

I think of the struggle he had trying to choose the right time. Of the two previous dates he had chosen, only to change his mind, because he wasn't ready. He had more living to do, even in his weakened state. Robert had AIDS and many complications from it.

It was not a snap decision, as the opponents would like you to think. It was the most difficult decision he ever had to make.

Robert loved life, and he allowed us to video a hundred hours of it, in his weakest and strongest times. He gave up the ultimate privacy, his own death, so that others might learn how the Oregon law works.

The documentary is now complete and is in the marketing process.

This issue is not going away. Although it affects hundreds of millions more folks than the abortion issue ever will, it is much the same. The issue is simple, "I want people to have the right to self determination." Robert told us. "I don't mean just from their government but in every personal aspect of their life. As long as they are not hurting anybody physically or otherwise it shouldn't make any difference to the guy next door."

Isn't that basic old-school conservative thinking?

When Judge Alito comes before the Senate Judiciary Committee, will anyone ask him about his views on this issue, which is before the current court, and upon which his vote could be the difference? There are many terminally ill Oregonians also those in other states (where the issue has yet to be decided) who are hoping for the peaceful option that we saw in Robert's eyes.

Posted Responses:

I wish they would ask Strip Search Sammy why he feels an illegal, intrusive strip search of a 10-year-old girl is good business. http://hughesforamerica.typepad.com/hughes_for_america/2005/10/strip_search_sa.html
Posted by: BobcatJH on December 12, 2005 at 08:34pm

I agree with your stand on the death with dignity issue, but it is just another hot button social issue which the right will use to beat Democrats over the head with. Why is it that, in none of the blogs concerning Alito, that no one brings up the issues of corporate personage and the commerce clause? These two issues are more likely to resonate with a broader section of the American public (including the religious right) then are abortion and death with dignity. They also touch upon the matter of activist jurists that cannot be explained away along partisan lines. If you really want to oppose Alito, it would be best to pursue these issues upon which many, left and right, will agree rather then another hot button social issue which will break down along predictable lines.
Posted by: LaughingLefty on December 12, 2005 at 08:39pm

Actually, you will find conservatives pretty fractured on this issue. A large number of us think the Administration and the Congress should have stayed out of it. On the other hand, the legal issues are not easy to surmount, particulalry in light of the commerce clause decisions written by liberal justices. Look at the medical mariuana case! It was conservative justices who sought to uphold the state law that time, and liberal justices who, in the interest of championing federal power over local power, told the sick and dying that they had to "take one for the team."
Posted by: Catothemuchyounger on December 12, 2005 at 09:11pm

Sorry Catothemuchyounger, but it was the Conservative justices who flip-flopped on the issue of states rights when it came to medical marijuana. They decided to go with their authoritarian instincts on that issue, and ruled against the states. The "Liberal" justices at least were consistent in their ideological support of the commerce clause. It was also consecutive Conservative Justice Depts. under Ashcroft then Gonzales that decided to go after medical marijuana users in stark contradiction to their lip service to states rights. It seems Conservatives only care about states rights when it suits their opposition to the rights of minorities and not when they are in contradiction to their more authoritarian instincts.
Posted by: LaughingLefty on December 12, 2005 at 10:01pm

Sorry, let me amend that. Thomas, Rehnquist and O'Connor supported the states while Scalia and Kennedy did not. http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/06/06/scotus.medical.marijuana/ One thing is for sure, if Alito is like Scalia, we're in trouble.
Posted by: LaughingLefty on December 12, 2005 at 10:10pm

----------------------------------------

Tom D'Antoni is a writer and TV producer/reporter living in Portland, Oregon. His hilarious book, "Rabid Nun Infects Entire Convent" based on his brief but potent career in tabloid "journalism" is just out from Villard/Random House. www.rabidnun.com

His documentary on physician-assisted suicide "Robert's Story: Dying With Dignity," co-directed by Greg Bond, is being marketed at the moment. It follows a terminally ill man from the day he got the medication that will kill him, prescribed legally under the Oregon Death With Dignity Act, through his death, 23 months later. He died on camera. www.robertsstory.com

Tom has written for many national and local newspapers and magazines, has been a national and local TV story producer, and he's been a network radio talk show host.

His is currently undergoing a bipolar experience promoting his goofy tabloid book and the super serious documentary at the same time.

Email this page to a friend Share on Facebook Share on StumbleUpon Print this page