Image provided by: Clackamas Community College; Oregon City, OR
About The Clackamas print. (Oregon City, Oregon) 1989-2019 | View Entire Issue (Feb. 1, 2006)
r ¡Clackamas Print Commentary 3*** Wednesday, Feb. 1. ' [ace Off: assisted suicide ruling tiding suicide undermines basic tenets of medicine Court's ruling upholds state and patients' rights Izabeth Hitz Derek Erickson '¡Clackamas Print s long as humankind [telligent mind they d suicide. Man has ig fascination with has possessed have contem- a deep, hair- the desperate hcient Japanese warriors killed kelves when they brought dishonor [eir families or were defeated in I By contrast, within the Catholic ch suicide is considered an unfor- lesin. a Nov. 8, 1994 Oregon Voters Id Measure 16, better known as the th with Dignity Act.” lis law allows patients with termi- Bnesses, whom at least two doctors [have less than six months left to [ to ask their doctor to kill them so can die humanely and with dignity, be law requires that the patient be a [adult (1 8 or over) and attend one or consultations*with a psychologist ermine that the person who wishes tamit suicide is mentally sound. ¡veral attempts have been made to il the act. The latest one was over- d on Jan. 17 by the U.S. Supreme [question is this: can handing out I prescription drugs, even to termi- ill patients, be considered a justifi- medical practice by any ethical doc- khatever happened to the physi- s Hippocratic cry of “do no harm?” s Lasagna, academic dean of the ol of Medicine at Tufts University, te the Hippocratic Oath in 1964. new version is used in most medi- olleges today. The new oath may I current society and views of cine, but it has also done away with do no harm” in favor of “it may be i my power to take a life.” uce the bill has been passed 208 e have taken advantage of the right ers. People who woke up every ng racked with pain, despairing i real good in their lives enough to call their doctor and tell him, “I want to die today.” I can not possibly comprehend the constant ravaging pain and hopeless ness that would drive someone to want to end their own life. But if the pain is the reason someone wants to die, then why aren’t trauma victims in chronic pain given the same right? Why limit the law to those who are going to die in six months? The whole thing stinks more of fear than a need for the pain to end. The matter of suicide could easily be divided into two major views. Human rights and nonreligious liberals would take one view. People have rights. They should legally be able to kill themselves, especially if those people are going to die painfully within six months any way. Besides, this way they relieve the heavy burden they place upon society and HMO’s, thus providing cheaper and better healthcare for those who really need it. Those who come from a religious stance might see the matter in another light. In many religions pain or hard ship is considered an ordeal that builds character and brings that person closer to their faith. Not only that, but to those with faiths that demand obedience to a higher deity (yes, Christians), suicide is con sidered a lack of trust in God and an act of direct disobedience. No matter how you package the idea, with glittery red tape and fancy wrap ping paper, suicide remains what it is and always has been - an escape from reality, and in my eyes, the chicken’s way out. The Clackamas Print The Supreme Court did something shock ing last week, something wonderful, some thing that should be done more often on a number of issues: they upheld a state’s right to make its own laws. Here in Oregon we have had our laws challenged by the federal government for some time. We as Oregon voters are the ones that put these laws into place. So does it seem fair for the federal gov ernment to step in on every social issue that doesnt tie into their dogma? Oregon is one of the only states left any more with a suicide law, as all the other states that once had them have had them repealed. The Or e g o n law allows a doctor to prescribe a lethal dos age of bar biturates to a terminal patient that is in intolerable amounts of pain. According to MSNBC, at least 171 people have taken this route since 1998, most of them cancer patients. People that receive the lethal dose of medication don’t have it admin istered to them. The Oregon law can be found at egov. oregon.gov, along with the criteria for receiv ing physician assisted suicide. In short it states that the patient must be at least 18, a resident of Oregon, capable of making their own health care decisions and have a terminal illness with less than six months left to live. After the patient has requested the Death with Dignity program, there is a 15-day wait ing period before the prescription is given. Oftentimes during this 15 day period a psy chological exam is required by the M.D. pre scribing the medication. For George Bush to attempt to butt in with federal politics again and take this law away from our state is ridiculous. His administra tion’s religious fanaticism was attempting to rob residents of Oregon their right to die without the costly, humiliating and painful symptoms that afflict them. When people think of our suicide law, they often relate it to Dr. Jack Kevorkian and his work. Others have heard of euthanasia. Euthanasia and Dr. Kevorkian are entirely aside of what happens in Oregon. No one hooked up to a death machine, half-conscious as someone pushes a button or fills a needle. These are sane and consenting adults that don’t want six more months hooked up to mechanical support with no control over their bodily functions, or in so much pain that they have to live in a near-coma to deal with it These people want out and know exactly what that means. On Jan. 17, residents of our state saw federal justice done correctly, because noth ing was changed at all. Thanks to the voices of the patients and the voices of Oregon residents, the “Death with Dignity Act,” a citizen’s initiative that was passed by a major ity of Oregon voters, still stands to help those who have no quality of life left. For more information on physician assist ed suicide visit http://egfrv.oregon.gov/DHS/ ph/pas/faqs.shtml i rowing caution to the river: building in floodplains a bad idea le Steele tlackamas Print M Tillamook County dur- flthe winter of 1996, 26 of rain were dumped Bog a 24-hour period, and Binned for many more days Hr1, Mie result was one of the Mt disasters that I have Ber witnessed in person. Cars M left in water that was Mst to their roofs, build- ■swere destroyed and many M, Tillamook’s livelihood, ■to be put down because of Miseases and injuries that ■befallen the county. Me initial cost of the dam- ■ fvas estimated in the bil- ^■but that didn’t count the Mrs who couldn’t afford to Clackamas Print «600 S. Molalla Ave. [gon City, OR 97045 P) 657-6958 ex. 2309 r C ucjmmas Print is a weekly Indent publication and is Pouted eyery Wednesday except finals week. rebuild, or jobs that were lost for good because the’compa nies didn’t want to rebuild in such a violent and unpredict able location. Many of these problems could have been avoided by not building in a floodplain below sea level. Lately we have dealt with flooding locally and nation ally, and much of the damage came from building in a space that is underwater for two to three months of the year. During Hurricane Katrina the news mentioned that some parts of New Orleans were about 26 feet below sea level; not an ideal place to build a city. For a hundred years it was fine, but when the big one came along, the devastation caused by being so far below the waterline was horrifying. Buildings were destroyed, families broken up and lives ended in this tragedy. New Orleans shows what can, and with enough time, will happen in an area that is prone to flooding. Building in a floodplain has always been a risk, but for some it’s way too tempt ing of an offer, either because of the waterfront view or the low price that may come with the dangers of the area. All of the reasons people have for building in a floodplain don’t mean a thing once they have nothing left. In the end, building on higher ground will save money because most flood damaged houses can never be used again. Building in a higher area may be a little more expensive at first, but with the risk involved it is definitely the safest bet. Being from the coast I’ve seen what can happen and the power that is involved, and it’s a battle that none can win. Floodplains are not the smartest place to build, but they can have many good uses for the environment, from starting new J habitats for other <T- c animals, or cre ating new, richer soil to grow in. Sometimes the best thing to do with a floodplain is to let it be, and see what happens with the land on its own. It E ditor - in -C hief : Ben Maras C opy E ditors : Katie Weinberg, E. E. A d A ssistant : Megan Cline S taff W riters : Courtney OTByme, P roduction A ssistants : Megan West Alexander Case, Derek Erickson, Justin Goe, Elizabeth Hitz, Frank Jordan, Mike Kimberling, Megan Koler, Adam J. Manley, Matthew Olson, Joe Piazzisi, Kim Schiewe, Tayo Stalnaker, Kyle Steele, David Stark N ews E ditor : Katie Wilson C ommentary E ditor : Laura Cameron F eature E ditor : C.J. Ciaramella S ports E ditor : Mike Giùdice A&E E ditor : Jadon Triplett P hoto E ditor : Jeff Sorensen A d M anager : Sam Krause Koler, Tayo Stalnaker, Adam J. Manley, Brandon Huddleston, Kraig Hansen P hotographers : Jake Dannen D epartment A dvisor : Linda Vogt D epartment A ssistant : Pat Lichen may even someday become a habitat for Oregon’s favorite animals, ducks and beavers, but you can decide who you like the best. eV* G oals : The C lackamas Print aims to report the news in an honest, unbiased, professional manner. The opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the stu dent body, college administration, its faculty or The Print. E-mail comments to chiefed@clackamas. edu.
