On April 2, I very briefly discussed the U.S. Supreme Court decision of Vacco v. Quill (1997). I promised more. So here, at least, is a bit more. To resume where I left off: the court's opinion, by Chief Justice Rehnquist, said this: "[W]e disagree with respondents' claim that the distinction between refusing lifesaving medical treatment and assisted suicide is 'arbitrary' and 'irrational.' ... Granted, in some cases, the line between the two may not be clear, but certainty is not required, even were it possible. Logic and contemporary practice support New York's judgment that the two acts are different, and New York may therefore, consistent with the Constitution, treat them differently." It had by then become customary for some patients to carry the "do not resuscitate" tag with them. The decision to so label a patient was NOT treated as murder. Providing the patient (a mature, rational patient in a lot of pain) with a pill tha...
