Law Commons^™

On Hastening Death Without Violating Legal Or Moral Prohibitions, Norman L. Cantor

Rutgers Law School (Newark) Faculty Papers

While the vast majority of fatally afflicted persons have a powerful wish to remain alive, some stricken persons may, for any of a host of reasons, desire to hasten death. Some persons are afflicted with chronic degenerative diseases that take a grievous toll. Chronic pain may be severe and intractable, anxiety about a future treatment regimen may be distressing, and helplessness may erode personal dignity and soil the image that the afflicted person wants to leave behind.

A dying patient’s interest in hastening death is often said to be in tension with a bedrock social principle that respect for sanctity …

On Kamisar, Killing, And The Future Of Physician-Assisted Death, Norman L. Cantor

Rutgers Law School (Newark) Faculty Papers

In a famous 1958 article, Yale Kamisar brilliantly examined the hazards of abuse and of slippery slope extensions that subsequently, for 46 years, served to thwart legalization of physician-assisted death (PAD). This paper shows that during the same period law and culture have effectively accepted a variety of ways for stricken people to hasten death, with physicians involved in diverse roles. Those ways include rejection of nutrition and hydration, terminal sedation, administration of risky analgesics, and withholding or withdrawal of medical life support.

If these existing lawful modes of hastening death were widely acknowledged, the pressure to legalize voluntary active …

The Relation Between Autonomy-Based Rights And Profoundly Disabled Persons, Norman L. Cantor

Rutgers Law School (Newark) Faculty Papers

“The Relation Between Autonomy-based Rights and Profoundly Mentally Disabled Persons” Competent persons have fundamental rights to decide about abortion, methods of contraception, and rejection of life-sustaining medical treatment. Profoundly disabled persons are so cognitively impaired that they cannot make their own serious medical decisions. Yet some courts suggest that the mentally impaired are entitled to “the same right” to choice regarding critical medical decisions as competent persons. This article discusses the puzzling question of how to relate autonomy-based rights to never-competent persons. It argues that while profoundly disabled persons cannot be entitled to make their own medical decisions, they have …

The Bane Of Surrogate Decision Making: Defining The Best Interests Of Never-Competent Persons, Norman L. Cantor

Rutgers Law School (Newark) Faculty Papers

The medical fate of never-competent persons cannot be resolved according to the approach governing previously competent persons -- surrogate focus on self-determination via advance instructions or projections of what the now-incompetent person would want in the circumstances. For never-competent medical patients, the commonly stated approach to surrogate decision making is best interests of the incapacitated ward.

This article examines and questions the conventional wisdom regarding a "best interests of the patient" standard. When a parent is the surrogate decision maker, the medical course chosen need not be the best course, so long as it is a plausible medical option and …