Right to Die Law Killed by Judge

Remigio Civitarese
Mag 16, 2018

Gen. Xavier Becerra said: "We strongly disagree with this ruling and the state is seeking expedited review in the Court of Appeal".

A Riverside County Superior Court judge Tuesday found California's physician-assisted suicide law unconstitutional because of how it was implemented.

In a statement, Life Legal Defense Foundation executive director Alexandra Snyder said, "We are thrilled by today's ruling, which reinstates critical legal protections for vulnerable patients". OR was the first to provide the option in 1997.

A total of seven states - California, Colorado, Hawaii, Montana, Oregon, Vermont and Washington - as well as the District of Columbia have laws on the books legalizing medical aid in dying for terminally ill patients, terminology preferred by advocates to the phrase "physician-assisted suicide."Supporters seek to widen legalization of the practice so that patients with incurable diseases can die with less pain and suffering".

Betsy Davis threw herself a party before becoming one of the first people to use a California law allowing her to take her own life in 2016.

Ottolia ruled that the California Legislature violated the law by passing the End of Life Option Act during a special session dedicated to healthcare issues.

Now, almost 1 in 5 Americans live in a state where physician-assisted suicide is legal, according to advocacy group Compassion and Choices.

Becerra claimed legislation passed during special sessions is presumed to be constitutional. Bill Monning, D-Carmel, vowed to re-introduce the measure before the full legislature. "Access to health care has no relationship to assisted suicide".

She has testified several times against assisted suicide.

The state's attorney general's office, in responding to the suit, noted that medical professionals have the right to refuse to prescribe and dispense the drugs.

The attorney general's office said in court documents that the act "provides comfort, support and an option to accommodate the very unique needs of terminally ill patients".

In lobbying against the law before state legislators, opponents argued that hastening death was morally wrong, that it puts terminally ill patients at risk for coerced death by loved ones and could become a way out for people who are uninsured or fearful of high medical bills.

Altre relazioniGrafFiotech

Discuti questo articolo

Segui i nostri GIORNALE