PHYSICIAN-ASSISTED SUICIDE: SUPREME COURT HEARS ARGUMENTS

      The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments today on two
 controversial cases testing the constitutionality of physician-
 assisted suicide.  The Court will arguments on cases from
 Washington and New York states "in which federal appeals courts
 ruled that state laws banning physician assisted suicide were
 unconstitutional," WASHINGTON POST reports (Okie, 1/8).  The
 federal appeals courts ruled last year that laws banning
 physician-assisted suicide are unconstitutional because they
 violate "either a person's right to 'liberty' or 'equal
 protection,' because people have a recognized right to refuse
 medical treatment, which could kill them" (Monmaney, LOS ANGELES
 TIMES, 1/8).  A ruling is expected by July (REUTERS/DETROIT NEWS,
 1/8).
      EFFECTS:  POST reports that if the high court rules in favor
 of the lower court decisions, "doctors would be legally allowed
 to prescribe lethal drugs to a terminally ill, mentally competent
 patient who requested them."  But no doctor would be required to
 help a patient in committing suicide (1/8).  TIMES reports that
 if the court upholds either case, "it would strike down laws in
 California and other states against physician-assisted suicide"
 (1/8).  POST notes that Oregon is the only state to have passed a
 law legalizing physician-assisted suicide, but so far, court
 decisions have prevented the measure from going into effect.  
       RIGHT TO DIE:  POST reports that "America's doctors remain
 deeply divided on the issue" of legalizing physician-assisted
 suicide.  Dr. Timothy Quill, a professor of medicine and
 psychiatry at the University of Rochester and a plaintiff in one
 of the cases, said, "I think there's very diverse opinion within
 the profession, just like there is within the society at large. 
 I do think most physicians are welcoming the conversation about
 these issues, because at least those who work with seriously ill
 patients are facing them on a regular basis" (1/8).  Appearing on
 CBS' "This Morning," Quill said, "When suffering gets extreme at
 the end and patients want to have a way out, we need to be able
 to have an open discussion about that, second opinions,
 safeguards, so that this kind of decision can be made out in the
 open and not in secret" (1/8).   
      OPPOSITION:  American Medical Association Board Chair Dr.
 Nancy Dickey said that in the Netherlands, "the only living
 laboratory where this has been tried," there are "close to 1,000
 who have been euthanized ... without consent and without their
 request."  She added, "There is an extraordinarily big difference
 between a patient whose illness is about to take their life in
 which we've put an artificial barrier [and] we remove that
 barrier ... versus the individual who says 'I've got a disease
 that sometime in the future is going to kill me and I'm going to
 prematurely select the day that I die" ("Today," NBC, 1/8). 
 Washington Attorney General Christine Gregoire (D) said, "We need
 to make sure that we don't rush to assisted suicide when in fact
 there are other things that could be done to help us get through
 those last days" ("This Morning," CBS, 1/8).  
      THE DOCS:  According to William Knaus, chair of the
 Department of Health Evaluation Sciences at the University of
 Virginia School of Medicine, "many physicians are 'astounded'
 that the Supreme Court may soon conclude" that a patient has a
 constitutional right to physician-assisted suicide.  He said,
 "That the Supreme Court is even considering it is breathtaking to
 many of us."  He added that if the lower court decisions are
 upheld, "the next day every person in this country could walk
 into a doctor's office or health care facility and demand
 suicide" (POST, 1/8).