SAN FRANCISCO — The Bush administration asked a federal appeals court here Monday to reconsider a May decision that upheld Oregon's assisted suicide law and prohibited federal charges against doctors who prescribe overdoses.

The administration wants the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to set aside its ruling backing the nation's only law allowing doctors to assist in hastening the death of patients. The Justice Department says the case, originally decided by a 2-1 vote, should be reheard with an 11-judge panel. Thirteen of the circuit's 25 full-time judges must agree to a rehearing, and they are rarely granted.

The three-judge panel in May ruled that, under the state's voter-approved law, Attorney General John Ashcroft cannot sanction or hold Oregon doctors criminally liable for prescribing overdoses.

The panel said the states were free to adopt such laws, while the administration claims federal drug laws prohibit doctors from dispensing medication to end a patient's life.

In its petition, the Justice Department said "assisting suicide is not a legitimate medical purpose" under federal law. The government added that assisting suicide violates the oath doctors take upon entering the profession.

Eli Stutsman, an attorney representing a pharmacist and doctor in the case, said the federal government has no authority over Oregon's assisted suicide law. "There is simply no basis in the construct or intent of federal law that gives the federal government the authority to regulate the practice of medicine or establish the standard of care in the states."

The May decision by the 9th Circuit upheld a decision by a lower court judge, who ruled that the Controlled Substances Act -- the federal law declaring what drugs doctors may prescribe -- does not give the federal government the power to say what is a legitimate medical practice.

The Oregon law allows terminally ill patients with less than six months to live to request a lethal dose of drugs after two doctors confirm the diagnosis and determine the patient to be mentally competent to make the request.

Since 1998, at least 171 people have used the law to end their lives, according to state records. Most of them suffered from cancer.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/po...house-headlines

You know, I'm really getting disgusted with this. George Bush is a Republican (is he ever). Republicans supposedly, and historically, value states' rights over federal control. But we've seen example after example of George Bush wanting to put his big brother controls over everything people in this country do that doesn't meet with his values. I hope Kerry brings this to people's attention, that we are living in an ever-increasing police state, between the invasions of privacy provided by the Patriot Act, the attempt to make a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage (rather than leave it up to individual states), the federal banning of allowing people to decide when and how they want to die when they are critically ill, the attempts to erode states' control of their school systems, and on and on and on. The intolerance of this born-again reformed alcoholic is frightening. If Americans don't wake up before November and get him out, I truly fear for what the next four years will bring.

This is a VERY complex issue for me personally! My brother and I have "power of attorney" for my mother who is in a CARE CENTER (second stroke) and is ok but "one day" we may have to make a decision? This issue as in "pro-choice" issues SHOULD be left up to the individual I believe :( I DON'T FEEL the government should be involved either way! QUITE FRANKLY I AM TORN IN TWO BY THIS ISSUE!
That said, I am NOT SURE how I would feel if SOCIETY accepted EUTHENASIA centers SUCH AS those in the 1973 movie "SOYLENT GREEN" where Edger G. Robinson went into a warehouse and was put to sleep (like a dog) :( :( :(
Finally, if and WHEN I depart this earthly plane I HOPE AND PRAY IT IS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NITE when I am having a beautiful dream :)

IN OTHER WORDS? I'M CONFUSED :dripple: ...................AndrewPaul

I lived in Oregon at the time the law was passed and I voted for it. I believe it's wrong for people to stand over someone dying in agony and tell them they aren't allowed to end it. Dang, if I were in enough pain I would want to shoot myself in the head and who cares whether it's legal or not. Lock me up after I'm dead. Most of all end of life care needs to be very conscientiously administered to keep people out of pain so they don't feel the need to take the suicide pills. I've read articles written by people who got the Rx and then, because their pain was addressed appropriately ended up not needing to use the Rx and dying naturally.

Basically, I agree that it should be left up to the individual and the govt. should stay out of it.

I have a daughter that is transfusion dependent and autistic, mentally delayed to the point that she's under 1 year of age mentally (although she's 12). I didn't have the strength (nor feel safe enough as I was in an abusive relationship) to make the decision to stop transfusing her, which would be removal of life support, so I gave her up to her father when she was four. I wish I had done more but it's too hard to do on ones own without support.

:( WOW! That's "heavy"! My heart goes out to ya.

Peace to ya..................AndrewPaul