Question

Jesse is a terminally ill Minnesota resident. She has expressed dismay over her worsening condition and asked whether the doctor would “help me to die.” A prolonged discussion with Jesse and her family regarding hastening death followed. After the discussion, both Jesse and the physician were convinced that she really wanted this. Accordingly, the physician described the options of palliative sedation to unconsciousness (PSU) and VSED. But Jesse was unwilling to pursue either of those two options because she found dehydrating to death to be morally repugnant. Since it is illegal in Minnesota, the physician never discussed physician aid-in-dying. Jesse subsequently died a protracted death with significant suffering. Jesse’s family has just consulted with you, a Minnesota attorney. They think that the physician should have presented Jesse with the option of obtaining physician aid-in-dying in Oregon or Washington (or even Switzerland, Belgium, or other jurisdictions where PAD is legal).

Part 1: Do you believe Jesse’s physician had a duty to discuss alternatives like the option of obtaining physician aid in dying in Oregon or Washington with Jesse and her family? Why or Why Not?

Part 2: Do you believe there should be a federal right to die statute in this country, why or why not?

Answer 1

Answer: According to the above mentioned case, the Jessie's physician doesn't have any kind of duty such as to discuss other options for physician aid specially incase of dying in Washington. Because it is still illegal in Washington and some of the places.

There should be federal right to die statue in this country because most of the patients are unable to cope up with the pain and they know that treatment will not have any positive effects.