Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012, October 14, 1997, Page 2, Image 2

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

    CONTACTING US
NEWSROOM: ADDRESS:
(541)346-5511 Oregon Daily Emerald
E-MAIL: P.O.BOX 3159
ode@oregon. uoregon.edu Eugene, Oregon 97403
ONLINE EDITION: darkwing.uoregon.edu/-ode
EDITOR-IN-CHIEF
Sarah Kickler
EDITORIAL EDITOR
Mike Schmierbacti
NIGHT EDITOR
Holly Sanders
m
Terminally ill should be allowed to choose
AN EMERALD EDITORIAL
Ending
your life
should be
a personal
decision
not subject
to legislative
control
\V7
W ;
e could begin this piece by
placing you in a hypothetical
situation where you were
slowly dying from some ter
minal illness. We could describe your
painful agony, your loss of dignity and
mental capacity and your inevitable lapse
into a vegetative state.
Frankly, we don’t see the need. We don’t
care what you, as an individual, choose to
do when faced with a terminal illness. If
you bravely endure the pain, making the
most out of every last minute, you are to be
admired. Similarly, if you carefully ponder
the situation and decide to end your life
while still in control of your destiny, you
are also to be admired.
The truth is we don’t care what you do
when you are about to die. It is because of
this that we support assisted suicide and
urge a vote against Measure 51.
Measure 51 would rescind Measure 16,
which was passed by the voters in 1994.
Measure 16 allowed, with a considerable
number of restrictions, terminally ill pa
tients to end their own lives with fatal
drugs prescribed by a doctor.
We object to even having to vote on this
issue again (see Monday’s Emerald). How
ever, we recognize this is an emotional is
sue for many people and that the election is
a referendum on assisted suicide and not
legislative interference.
Our personal feelings about assisted sui
cide differ. No one really knows how they
will face their last days until the calendar
becomes thin.
However, recognizing that some
people want the option of ending
their lives painlessly, we support
their right to do so, as estab
lished under Measure 16. /C
Opponents of Measure 16
have expressed concerns
about the ambiguity of parts
of the law. Ambiguities do
exist, but the assisted sui
cide measure is reasonably
well worded.
Unlike the Netherlands’
oft-cited assisted suicide
policy, Oregon’s law does
not allow doctors to kill
their patients. The law re
quires that patients be declared
mentally competent by two physi
cians. In addition, doctors have to deter
mine that patients have six months or less
to live. Only then can they request a doctor
to prescribe a lethal dose of dnigs, which
patients must take on their own.
Because this wording is quite different
from the way euthanasia operates in the
Netherlands, many of the comparisons be
ing made between the two laws are unfair.
Doctors will not be able to kill their pa
tients, nor can they ignore patients who
change their minds about wanting to die.
Admittedly, doctors can be in error about
the length of time a patient has to live. With
a second opinion, the odds of this happen
ing are smaller. Moreover, patients still
have
to decide
whether they
are ready to die
based on their personal
reelings and the medical evidence avail
able.
Proponents of Measure 51 also have ar
gued the prescribed drugs do not always
immediately kill a patient. This claim ig
nores the fact that, in those rare instances
when patients did not die within minutes,
they were rendered unconscious and pain
free by the drugs before they passed away.
By relying upon scare tactics
that either draw inaccurate com
parisons to the Netherlands or mis
interpret flawed medical studies, the
opponents of assisted suicide have
shifted the focus of discussion away from
the crucial issue: choice.
The real question to ask when voting on
Measure 51 is whether someone should be
able to tell us how to live — and end — our
lives. We don’t think the Legislature
should control our deaths or override our
votes, and because of this, we advocate a no
vote on Measure 51.
This editorial represents the opinion of the
Emerald editorial board. Responses may be
sent to ode@oregon .uoregon .edu
CORRECTIONS
The headline on Page 1 of the
Emerald (ODE, Oct. 8) should
have read “OSPIRG offers sup
port of endangered species.”
In the story “Frohnmayer crit
icizes higher ed budget” (ODE,
Oct. 9), it should have said the
University receives the smallest
amount of money per student.
The Emerald regrets the er
rors.
LETTERS TO THE EDiTOR
Not the norm
It’s no surprise that an open party with unlimited ac
cess to alcohol outgrows the hosts’ ability to manage
the crowd. Such was the case on Saturday, Oct. 4 dur
ing a party near campus that got out of control and led
to police intervention and four arrests. But let’s not let
this one incident lead everyone to believe that binge
drinking and unlawful behavior is the campus norm.
It’s not.
According to the CORE Alcohol and Drug Survey
conducted every two years at the University, most stu
dents do not binge drink. In fact, most students aver
age five or fewer drinks per week. Furthermore, only
half of University students use alcohol at least once a
week. Lastly, over two-thirds of the students never get
into fights, never miss a class and never regret their be
havior due to alcohol or drug use.
Think about it. There were 200 people at the Oct. 4
party and over 12,000 University undergraduates who
weren’t. Most University students act responsibly and
don’t end up as headline news. They end up as gradu
ates.
Linda Devine, Linda Hoover
Office of the Dean of Student Life
Thumbs
RIOTING:
A certain degree of
common sense is
required when deal
ing with police. Be
polite, do what they
tell you (within rea
son) and don't
throw stuff at them.
In return, the police
probably won't use
tear gas and pepper
spray. Someof the
blame for the recent
“riot" lies with party
hosts who failed to
control the situation,
but most of the
blame tells upon
guests who lacked
both common
sense and common
courtesy when re
sponding to law en
forcement.
THE U.S. STANCE
ON GLOBAL
WARMING:
Despite a consen
sus of 2,000 scien
tists who sat on a
U.N. panel that hu
man behavior isin
fluencingthe cli
mate and that
increased emission
of greenhouse
gasses will lead to
planetary warming,
Clinton continues
to waffle on the is
sue. At a confer
ence on the suh
ject. he pledged to
support restrictions
on greenhouse
gasses, but oniy if
other nations act
first. As an industri
alized nation with a
strong economy,
the United States
should be an envi
ronmental leader,
not a follower.
TERRORIST LISTS:
Obeying a congres
sional mandate, the
State Dept, just re
leased a list of 30
"terrorisr groups.
The groups will
have their assets
frozen and their
fund-raising efforts
stopped within the
United States. Not
surprisingly, the list
includes a large
number of Islamic
groups—13—
which are the tradi
tional scapegoats
for U.S. policy mak
ers. Such a list is a
frightening devel
opment and hear
tens back to the
McCarthy days
when the FBI
watched citizens—
only now there is
an added racist
undertone.