Monday, February 26, 2007

More About Forced Cooperation in Assisted Suicide

I have written some more about the requirement in California's A.B. 374, which would legalize physician-assisted suicide, that Catholic nursing homes, in-patient hospice facilities, and other health care providers permit assisted suicide to take place on premises. It is over at the First Things blog.

Labels:

4 Comments:

At February 26, 2007 , Blogger Wesley J. Smith said...

Over at Crunchy Con, Rod Dreher referenced my FT piece, kicking up a little dust. One commenter there pointed out that 7195 (b)(2) declares that the "intent" of the legislature "that this legislation be strictly construed and not expanded in any manner." That would mean that since the legislation only permits an acute care hospital to refuse to permit assisted suicides on premises, could not be expanded to include nursing homes, in-patient hospice facilities, etc. Seals the deal on my interpretation.

This is to prevent the unwilling from not being complicit in assisted suicide. How like the death culture.

 
At February 26, 2007 , Blogger Wesley J. Smith said...

Crunchy Con is on Belief Net. http://www.beliefnet.com/blogs/crunchycon

 
At February 27, 2007 , Blogger Lydia McGrew said...

Ah, so if I get this right, they put a supposed "conscience clause" in there allowing a "provider" to refuse to provide assisted suicide. Then this is used to contradict what you say about "forced cooperation." But you're still right, because even if a doctor can't be forced to prescribe the overdose (for example), the facility can be forced to sit by while he does so. Normally, facilities get to set policies (like, no abortions) and have punishments (like denial of privileges) for doctors who violate them. But not here.

 
At February 27, 2007 , Blogger Wesley J. Smith said...

Give Lydia a cigar. Exactly.

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home