An Analysis of Oregon’s Process of Defending Right to Die in Its Death with Dignity Act: From Tackling External Challenges to Making Internal Changes

Abstract

The right to die movement in the United States has evolved through two distinct phases: initially recognizing the right of terminally ill patients to refuse treatment, followed by the advocacy for death with dignity, often involving physician-assisted suicide. While the right to refuse treatment gained acceptance in the 1980s, the concept of death with dignity remains contentious to this day. Oregon has been a pioneer in this field, enacting the Death with Dignity Act, the world’s first law allowing physician-assisted death. Nevertheless, research has predominantly focused on the act’s impacts rather than its evolution and new changes. Thus, this study aims to explore two key questions: What are the changes in Oregon’s Death with Dignity Act? And what has made these changes possible? This study reveals that for one thing, from Lee v. Oregon (1994-1997) to Oregon v. Gonzales (2001-2006), Oregon has consistently upheld death with dignity and secured favorable outcomes in Supreme Court rulings; for another, amendments to the act, such as Senate Bill 579 (2019-2020) to House Bill 2279 (2023), have prioritized the interests of Oregon’s residents while effectively countering challenges from the federal government. This study suggests that these transformations involve individual, state, and federal levels, emphasizing individual rights, legal precedents, and federalism. However, the Death with Dignity Act only applies to patients capable of communication, indicating ongoing efforts needed.