Book Review: Reflection on Neil Gorsuch's The Future of Assisted Suicide and Euthansia

Author: Member of History Committee

Early in his career, before becoming a justice on the Supreme Court, Neil Gorsuch authored a book, The Future of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia. This book focuses on the philosophical and legal arguments for and against Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia. He cited various empirical studies and data on this issue. The arguments are well-researched and provide an opportunity to think critically about the issue and the legal and moral tension it creates. Here, we will briefly reflect on some highlights that raise some valuable points. We highly recommend the book, especially in light of the recent NY legislative debate on Assisted Suicide.

Legal Background

In the legal realm, Gorsuch opens with assessing some Supreme Court case law on the issue and state laws governing assisted suicide and euthanasia. Among the notable cases he highlighted are as follows:

In Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health, the Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, affirmed the right of the state of Missouri to require a clear and convincing evidence standard before allowing a patient to refuse lifesaving medical treatment. It focused on the concept of "informed consent" within the tradition of the United States and penal law regarding battery, as well as the common law view on touching others without their consent. When Justice Gorsuch reflects on this case, he notes that one should not construe this decision as an endorsement of the practice of assisted suicide. He states, "The common law's interest in protecting bodily integrity from unwanted physical invasions- the interest the Court in Cruzan sought to protect – simply is not at issue in cases covered by the proffered right to consensual assisted suicide or euthanasia." He adds, "the refusal of care simply is not logically equivalent to a right to hasten death." It lacks a consistent element of intent to "kill or help kill, while seeking out or participating in assisted suicide or euthanasia always does." [1]

In Washington v. Glucksberg, the Supreme Court found in a unanimous 9-0 decision that state laws banning assisted suicide were not facially unconstitutional. These laws were not a violation of due process and assisted suicide should not be considered a liberty interest as a matter of Constitutional law. Gorsuch did note, however, that "a majority of the Court reserved judgment on the constitutionality of the practice as applied to terminally ill adults. [2] This is significant because much of the state law that allows room for assisted suicide or death-inducing doctor-prescribed medications focuses on situations when the patient is terminally ill.

Philosophical Perspectives

Justice Gorsuch addressed some philosophical perspectives on assisted suicide and euthanasia. Among the notable theories he highlighted that have circulated in society include the following:

He cited the utilitarian argument, which considers the greatest social benefit at the lowest cost. With this view, theorists propose accessibility to euthanasia and assisted suicide in circumstances open only to the incurably suffering or terminally ill.[3] Other arguments under this umbrella consider reducing medical costs through less expensive end-of-life care and fewer services and resources allocated to those with no hope of recovery. He then discusses how the Dutch have liberalized laws when considering euthanasia and assisted suicide, and have moved away from simply administering to the terminally ill who are suffering in a strict sense. Doctors are entrusted with greater discretion when making decisions and have more freedom with end-of-life prescriptions or meeting the demands of the patient to fulfill their obligations under the law.

Next, he cited the libertarian view, which concludes that the legalization of assisted suicide should occur no matter the costs or benefits. He explained that common support for this view rests in the "rationalist" view in that one does not need to be terminal to qualify for assisted suicide or euthanasia, but instead requires rational decision-making to choose death over life. There is a significant emphasis on the power of individual choice in this matter. People can determine when they are healthy or not, and it is not; however, in err for laws to continue being passed that ban assisted suicide for healthy people. Gorsuch firmly pushes back on this view, finding it inadequate because it fails to consider the objective physical or psychological circumstances of a given individual and precludes collective consideration of that assessment. [4] It is an unreliable metric to consistently rely only on one's personal view of oneself in assessing a "health standard."

Finally, he offers his own concept on the issue and challenges the legalization of euthanasia and assisted suicide. The other theories do not persuade him. His argument focuses on what he terms an "inviolability of life principle," which offers that "human life is fundamentally and inherently valuable and that the intentional taking of human life by private persons is always wrong." [5] Life has intrinsic value. He points to examples of actions commonly taken to protect human life, such as caring for people with serious illnesses or advocating for the equality of all individuals because they all possess innate dignity. There is no intention to consider this care an instrumentality for personal gain consistently; instead, it maintains a certain reverence for life itself and recognizes the innate value of life. This view draws challenges as Gorsuch cites opposition that focuses on the grounds of self-defense. What if self-defense requires taking a life? Does this not reject life's innate value? He counters by explaining that intent is a key element. Those in that situation do not possess the intent to kill; instead, they are acting to protect themselves from imminent death.

Conclusion

Overall, The Future of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia was an excellent book, and we highly recommend it. It provides an in-depth view of the legal, philosophical, and moral tensions regarding euthanasia and assisted suicide. Gorsuch discusses various arguments, including their strengths and weaknesses, as well as empirical studies and statistics on the issue.

Overall, The Future of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia was an excellent book, and I highly recommend it. It provides an in-depth view of the legal, philosophical, and moral tensions regarding euthanasia and assisted suicide. Gorsuch discusses various arguments, including their strengths and weaknesses, as well as empirical studies and statistics on the issue. Ultimately, Jude Gorsuch defends his argument that all human life is intrinsically valuable and that the taking of human life by private persons is wrong.

This issue is gaining traction in society again, with the New York Legislature passing an Assisted Suicide bill that awaits the signature of Governor Kathy Hochul (a similar bill was signed into law a few years ago in New Jersey). This would be a regrettable development in New York if it were to pass. We encourage you to continue to speak out against this bill.

[1] Neil M. Gorsuch, The Future of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia 84 (2006).

[2] Id. at 216

[3] Id. at 102.

[4] Id. at 156

[5] Id. at 157