|
The conservative Montana Family Foundation bemoaned the court's opinion that found the practice legal on statutory grounds. The assisted suicide opponents promised to take the fight to the Legislature.
"Definitely not what we wanted, but not as bad as it could have been," group president Jeff Laszloffy said in an e-mail update to members. "The fact that the court did not find a constitutional right to physician assisted suicide is good for those of us opposed to this abhorrent practice."
The Supreme Court, pointing to the Legislature's own policy-making, ruled that assisted suicide is an acceptable defense to any homicide charges against the doctor.
"In physician aid in dying, the patient, not the physician, commits the final death-causing act by self-administering a lethal dose of medicine," Justice William Leaphart wrote for the court.
Justice John Warner, serving his last day on the court, wrote in a separate concurring opinion that the court decided to leave the constitutional issues alone because addressing them was not necessary.
Justice James Nelson, a more liberal member of the court, said he would have extended the constitutional right to the procedure as the lower court had.
Two judges dissented from the decision, saying the court was reversing long-standing public policy.
"Until the public policy is changed by the democratic process, it should be recognized and enforced by the courts," wrote Justice Jim Rice for the minority. "In my view, the court's conclusion is without support, without clear reason, and without moral force."
[Associated
Press;
Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
News | Sports | Business | Rural Review | Teaching & Learning | Home and Family | Tourism | Obituaries
Community |
Perspectives
|
Law & Courts |
Leisure Time
|
Spiritual Life |
Health & Fitness |
Teen Scene
Calendar
|
Letters to the Editor