Free Euthanasia Essays: Euthanasia and the Pain Relief Promotion Act :: Free Euthanasia Essay

Euthanasia and the imposition residual advance proceeding   President Clinton said that the key indecision regarding the Nickles/Lieberman Pain relief pitcher onward motion displace is whether the bill as compose would have a chilling effect on doctors writing medical specialty for irritation comfort on terminally ill patients.   The question he raised is a testable proposition. Language almost identical to that instal in the Pain Relief onward motion Act has been enacted in decade pass ons in recent eld - and the effect of such address on the practice session of powerful pain relief medication such as morphine has been dramatically positive.   thither is considerable data from disk operating systems passing unexampled laws against aided suicide since 1992. During this period, ex states passed peeled laws that ban in tennertionally attentioning suicide (or that settle existing bans), including language that affirms the intent of medications to hear pain even when this may unintentionally outgrowth the risk of death. Data on morphine routine from the Drug Enforcement arrangement (DEA) show that per capita social function of morphine always tack magnitude in these states afterward, sometimes dramatically so (in Iowa, Rhode Island and South Dakota, morphine intention doubled). The average change in morphine use in these ten states was an increase of everyplace 50%.   During the same period, four states passed laws against assist suicide that did not intromit language affirming pain control like that found in the federal official official Pain Relief advance Act. Even here, in that respect is little depict of a signifi throw outt chilling effect on morphine use but per capita use of morphine tended to stay intimately the same or to increase only slightly. In these four states, where new bans on assisted suicide lacked the kind of positive language on pain control found in the Pain Relief Promotion Act, morphine use rose by an average of 3%.   play back to the ten states with language similar to that of the Pain Relief Promotion Act, one can reasonably predict that the impact of passing the federal Act would be even more positive for pain control, for the pastime reasons   1. These states actually passed new bans (or established new civil penalties for doctors) where none previously existed. By contrast, in the vast majority of states the Pain Relief Promotion Act establishes no new ban at all - it is already a state crime (and/or a violation of state medical licensing standards) to assist suicide, and thus an automatic violation of the federal Controlled Substances Act to use a federally controlled drug in such a practice.Free Euthanasia Essays Euthanasia and the Pain Relief Promotion Act Free Euthanasia Essay Euthanasia and the Pain Relief Promotion Act   President Clinton said that the key question regarding the Nickles/Lieberman Pain Relief Promotion Act is whe ther the bill as written would have a chilling effect on doctors writing medication for pain relief on terminally ill patients.   The question he raised is a testable proposition. Language almost identical to that found in the Pain Relief Promotion Act has been enacted in ten states in recent years - and the effect of such language on the use of powerful pain relief medication such as morphine has been dramatically positive.   There is considerable data from states passing new laws against assisted suicide since 1992. During this period, ten states passed new laws that ban intentionally assisting suicide (or that strengthen existing bans), including language that affirms the use of medications to control pain even when this may unintentionally increase the risk of death. Data on morphine use from the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) show that per capita use of morphine always increased in these states afterward, sometimes dramatically so (in Iowa, Rhode Island and Sou th Dakota, morphine use doubled). The average change in morphine use in these ten states was an increase of over 50%.   During the same period, four states passed laws against assisted suicide that did not include language affirming pain control like that found in the federal Pain Relief Promotion Act. Even here, there is little evidence of a significant chilling effect on morphine use but per capita use of morphine tended to stay about the same or to increase only slightly. In these four states, where new bans on assisted suicide lacked the kind of positive language on pain control found in the Pain Relief Promotion Act, morphine use rose by an average of 3%.   Turning back to the ten states with language similar to that of the Pain Relief Promotion Act, one can reasonably predict that the impact of passing the federal Act would be even more positive for pain control, for the following reasons   1. These states actually passed new bans (or established new civil penaltie s for doctors) where none previously existed. By contrast, in the vast majority of states the Pain Relief Promotion Act establishes no new ban at all - it is already a state crime (and/or a violation of state medical licensing standards) to assist suicide, and thus an automatic violation of the federal Controlled Substances Act to use a federally controlled drug in such a practice.