I've read all the comments and while I would like to respond individually I will handle a couple recurring themes first.

The reason that the medical profession, the AMA, is against assisted suicide is because doctors take an oath, the Hippocratic oath, to preserve life. By assisting someone to commit suicide they are breaking that oath. We shouldn't sentence people to death because the medical profession hasn't adequately dealt with pain management. But some doctors, if given the choice to try hard and relieve you suffering or kill you, will take the easy way out. No way to regulate it. In the Netherlands where assisted suicide was not prosecuted at the time of the Kevorkian cases, people wore necklaces saying "don't kill me" because 60% of people in hospitals were killed without consent.

As for regulating it, just because there are laws does not mean it's regulated. For those of you that believe as I do that WE ALL HAVE A RIGHT TO DIE, why in Oregon for instance is it only the "terminally ill" with 6 months to live that have the right? Do you seriously believe that in the 7th month they are not in excruciating pain? Or that doctors don't arbitrarily announce the 6th month? What about someone who lost their family in the Oklahoma City bombing and just doesn't want to live anymore? In Oregon they can't avail themselves of the law. Who decides if they can even die if they only have 6 months to live? The courts and psychiatrists who have to certify that the person is mentally sound. We have suicide hotlines because we think people that are suicidal have a mental defect--should suicide hotlines be illegal or can some suicidal people not have a mental defect? Either way it's not the person making the decision, it's the courts.

Freshman year in college I watched a video of a man with 3rd degree burns over a large portion of his body. The way they treat burns like that is to keep you submerged in water to keep the burns moist which is stupidly painful. They man was screaming, "kill me, kill me." The man survived the treatment and afterwards was shown the tape of himself screaming, "kill me, kill, me" and was asked, "did you really want to die?" He said "of course not." The only way to know if someone really wants to die is if they do it themselves.

As for not everyone can do it, everyone can commit suicide, they just might not like how they have to do it. Sorry, it's nice to say you want to die in a nice fashion but the people you want to do it have taken an oath to preserve your life. Everyone can stop eating, etc. Not intending to sound cruel which many of you will jump on but of course it's a difficult subject. I'm really surprised that I haven't read, or maybe missed it, that we treat our animals better. Animals cannot commit suicide--they need our help.

There are studies that suicide is contagious for those of you that want to do the research. Responsible societies cannot push it and while it would be nice if they could find a way to provide "death with dignity" (for those of you that get on me for using emotional terms) where does it say that carbon monoxide that kevorkian used or any other drug is a painless way to go? Has someone come back to tell us?

@lerlo. But, you were the only attorney, that I found in this entire posting! You also, misinterpreted my 'lawyer' statement! I said, 'we need a clever lawyer'...I never indicated anywhere in my responces that I didn't LIKE lawyers...I don't even know any!! (This is an assumption). I would say, that we are the PUBLIC. You would normally be representing the society at large, wouldn't you? Because, you had more facts about the 'justice system' than others on this forum, you dismissed most of the input from it! It seems to me like...you presented your 'book learning,' as more important than a desire to maintain our 'social order!' AND, you know what!! ...my opinion is as valid as the next person's! Here alone, is a 'lack of wisdom' on your part...not everyone's ideas has 'value' in your 'big picture!' Sir, I am a very serious person and mostly 'self-educated'...and on one of your responces, you stated, that 'some of you, just want to talk'(another assumption)...(even the ignorant have ideas)...that was an insult, any way you slice it! You may not have learned much here (I am still kinda of wondering why you are on this forum), because, I have not found another person so far (and you can read what I post), on this forum that treats LIFE like a 'text book'...I mean without...all of what HUMANITY is made up of! HOWEVER, my concern is...justice is at risk, when any person in authority...is the driving force with his NARROW life view... as fair and balanced with the fate of another human being in his hands! I believe the present state of our current social order, stands as an example of MAJOR disarray! If you gained nothing from YOUR own post...I bet, a lot of the rest of us did as this would not be a subject matter, that shallow minded people would tackle!

@lerlo. But, you were the only attorney, that I found in this entire posting! You also, misinterpreted my 'lawyer' statement! I said, 'we need a clever lawyer'...I never indicated anywhere in my responces that I didn't LIKE lawyers...I don't even know any!! (This is an assumption). I would say, that we are the PUBLIC. You would normally be representing the society at large, wouldn't you? Because, you had more facts about the 'justice system' than others on this forum, you dismissed most of the input from it! It seems to me like...you presented your 'book learning,' as more important than a desire to maintain our 'social order!' AND, you know what!! ...my opinion is as valid as the next person's! Here alone, is a 'lack of wisdom' on your part...not everyone's ideas has 'value' in your 'big picture!' Sir, I am a very serious person and mostly 'self-educated'...and on one of your responces, you stated, that 'some of you, just want to talk'(another assumption)...(even the ignorant have ideas)...that was an insult, any way you slice it! You may not have learned much here (I am still kinda of wondering why you are on this forum), because, I have not found another person so far (and you can read what I post), on this forum that treats LIFE like a 'text book'...I mean without...all of what HUMANITY is made up of! HOWEVER, my concern is...justice is at risk, when any person in authority...is the driving force with his NARROW life view... as fair and balanced with the fate of another human being in his hands! I believe the present state of our current social order, stands as an example of MAJOR disarray! If you gained nothing from YOUR own post...I bet, a lot of the rest of us did as this would not be a subject matter, that shallow minded people would tackle!

@lerlo, I want to sincerely thank you for your post. I must admit that at the beginning, I was a bit mystified as to why you posted your Kevorkian case...as example to teach us something about sucuide. But after reading ALL the posts...I came to the realization of WHY our justice system is not fair and just. Without, your honest and candid responses, this would not have revealed itself. You have expert skills in where/how to find the law that covers the unlawful charge. It appears you are skilled in applying 'that law' (as with Kevorkian). However, you became an untrained expert on your 'subject', even down to analyzing certain drawings by Kevorkian and his behavior towards a patient's time of death and guessing on people's motives (I.e. woman who was 'tired of caring for her husband'. But, in all your responces...you lacked WISDOM about 'sucuide,' much less on 'death and dying.' Where was your life experiences? Even when prompted...you recited 'codes' and 'laws' and 'regulations!' What kind of a world would we have, if everyone lived their life in a bubble like that? If you noticed it was pointed out, that your position was '10 against...to 01!' So NOW, I understand why district attorneys want concede even when more evidence is brought to light and sometimes even when 'scientific' DNA is presented! You developed great skills to read and apply the 'rule of law,' when people break the law. But somewhere you must have blocked out what it takes to obtain wisdom! Because, I never found a thing that was WISE, in your post! I believe this is the reason you received so much flack! If this sounds like I am 'beating up' on you, I AM NOT! You inadvertently helped me to understand why people must have clever lawyers and luck to get "real justice' in our present system!
Just like 'book' learning is never enough...a DA without wisdom, but great 'law knowledge' will give us 'the luck of the draw' in our justice system! If this sounds harsh...it is! Even so, I still feel grateful to you for this revelation!

@Lerlo...as a witness to so many unfortunate and horrible things over the span of 78 years, I have learned that it is not the criminal that creates the most harm in the world. It is from the ignorance of otherwise good people that can and does cause much harm! I myself, have been one of those people! But, I never give up on making adjustments...even here in old age!

@lwelo, I have not thought of Kevorkian in years! I learned what I could from that situation and moved on. You did not share what YOU had learned 'OUT' of that experience. From your writings...you seem to be re-litgating the Kevorkian case. I am at a disavantage here without research and only some pretty clear memories. I do know without research, that 'life and death' issues have been taking place every day, month and year, since the 'Kevorkian case.' Using just one example to prove your point, seems shortsighted to me. I also, sense a 'put down'..."Thanks for the psychoanalysis," which helps prove my point...your "world view" seems pretty much, 'black and white!' Good luck with that!

@lerlo, it appears to me that you operate in a 'black and white' manner. You have no grays in your concepts! And, you make more assumptions than I am conformable with! What you might do, and what another person might do, under the same circumstances just might be altogether different! I have never met two people who behaved the same way about hardly anything. That being said, I am also wondering why this issue with Kevorkian is coming up for you so many years later? And, it would seem by your writings that you would handle the Kevorkian issue the same way that you did, back in the day. Yes...YOU know the law...or laws! But, it has been my experience that as my life has progressed over 50 of my last 78 years...that as i took in more information, it altered my ideas to the point, that my position today no where even resembles how I once understood certain issues...not even 25 years ago. I also may be 'a law abiding citizen' but I would not hesitate to break a law if it made no sense, for a particular moment! I don't make my own laws...neither will I follow 'laws' in blind faith...and I will take responsibility for my actions! I might hold myself to a higher moral code than the average person. I appreciate your responces, but there is still a question in my mind, why you bring YOUR Kevorkian issue up after so many years? Because, I have learned to move on from any past experience, asap...(I wonder if I could bring up something from just 5 yrs ago!) Each one of us must settle in our own mind, the life and death issue! And, I would never impose what I might do on any other person! I believe you can do the same at this moment in time. If we all become slaves, I guess that will change!

#lerlo, You seem stuck on 'The Law.' How is it that every "against the law,' situation, has some way around it? The 'right' attorney is needed and the 'luck of the draw,' for jury duty! Sir, you may have lots of facts, but it appears you could have a 'blind spot?' You reported that a man's mask was removed, to calm the man down...but you did not report that the man HIMSELF said 'stop' or 'proceed!' And, you added as if you were privy...'wife'...'she wanted him dead, because she was tired of taking care of him NO DOUBT(capital letters mone)!' Was, this a fact or assumption on your part? Sounds like mindreading to me! Maybe I am way out here in SOME field on this, but you tell your side as if you were there, 'like a fly on the wall,' reporting back to us! You make so many assumptions that it causes me to question your reasoning! With my type of personality, I would not allow my doctor to be consulted, if I decided to commit suicide. Who is he/she to block my free will? And, I might have already discussed it with my doctor...not to support me in dying...but support for me as a person!
...'pushing the medical profession to work on pain treatments,' ...'and not sentencing people to death'...shows a lack of knowledge on the nature of pain! 'They' developed pain treatments and we have thousands of people dying each day, from their pain treatment! Where have you been hiding out, all this time? And, let me add here, that this Country by law, has put people to death in...I believe every state in this country!! So is it 'putting people to death' that bothers you or are you on some kind of 'late life' campagn to 'justify' your position in the Kevorkian case? In my opinion, we should have the right to die when we choose. If a person should be in some delusional state, then, very attempt should be made to bring that person around. It is not the person that chooses to exit, that may be having the difficulty. It is the 'other' people who must face the loss and sadness (psychic pain and a challege to a person's belief system) that would take place around this 'life or death' event. I hope that you find the law, that puts this issue to rest...at least for you. I frankly struggled with your last statement...'violate the equal protection of all of our rights to die.' ???

You started off with your original post with a, what seemed, somewhat genuine issue, but in all your responses have been either condescending, misleading or at the least, disingenuous. I will say, a conversation has ensued, so, for that, we owe you.

Since I know what it took to get to where you were when you charged Dr. Kevorkian, you were not unfamiliar with research. You imply regulations still lacked in overseeing assisted suicides. What did you find out about the places that had already legalized it? How did they deal with regulating it?

As a follow up, let me give you my perspective on the law in the U.S as it stands and the problems I see with it. The U.S. Constitution says in the 10th Amendment that anything not included in it is left to the states. Now in the area of privacy the Supreme Court has, under the guise of the 14th Amendment found a right to privacy. There is no explicit right to die in the Constitution but it could easily fall under the 14th Amendment. As I stated I think we all have a right to die, terminally ill (we all are) or otherwise. There is NO right to assisted suicide in the U.S. Constitution since it includes another person and can't be considered privacy. Therefore it is left to the states. If a state wants to pass a law allowing assisted suicide they can--if you want one you go to that state.

The problem for me for instance let's take Oregon. To date I believe only 100 people have used the law. We don't create laws for 100 people. it's not a boutique kinda thing. Then only patients that are "terminally ill" with 6 months to live are allowed to use it assuming two psychiatrists and a court agree they are of sound mind.

1. What if I just want to die because it's my right because life sucks or I just don't want to live anymore. What happened to equal protection of the laws? What about MY right to die? You don't think it's a bit arbitrary to say 5 months? They aren't in horrible pain in the 7th month? See the problem with setting such rules, limits? What about their mental condition? Is someone in horrible pain in their right mind? We have suicide hotlines because we think people that are suicidal need help. Should suicide hotlines be illegal?

2. Doctors take a Hippocratic oath to preserve life--not end it. Allowing them to help people die is a violation of that oath which is why the AMA is against it. We should be encouraging the medical profession to deal with pain not take the easy way out and just kill people.

It's nice to use phrases like "death with dignity." There are all kinds of poisons out there that people can take without putting doctors in an ethical dilemma. I'm not sure taking an overdose or lethal amount of drug is dignity but just because it sounds so--doesn't make it so. Kevorkian used carbon monoxide gas. It is a difficult and, as I said originally, painful and emotional subject. Loved ones help people die all the time and juries use jury nullification to ignore the law and acquit them.

Once a law says that a court or a psychiatrist gets to make the decision it is no longer the right of the person to make the decision. This is why in my opinion legislation can't solve the problem. If everyone has the same right it needs to be for everyone. If you let someone help, you have to look at their motives for helping and whether they really had
informed consent. Of course I personally think society should be encouraging people to live. Although I know that many of you don't understand societal pressure once there is a limit or "quality of life" set by some law, as I said previously, the handicapped community was afraid that, as happened in nazi Germany where handicapped people were killed because of their quality of life, that there would be societal pressure placed on them if "quality of life" limtis, suggestions or ideals were set up.

If you think you have a right to assisted suicide if someone won;t help you can you sue them for violating your right if they won't help you? Or is it just something that would be nice to have? All of us have the right to commit suicide, you may not like how they have to do it, but the only way you know if someone really wants to die is if they do it themselves. Just my two cents, well maybe three. Hopefully it will bring up some issues that you may not have considered before.

I'm always suspicious when someone insists so carefully & resolutely as to how much of an expert he/she is on a subject. It usually means a strong opinion is headed this way.

A slippery slope is no reason not to climb a mountain.

I don't think it should be illegal to take your own life. It's your life you should be able to make that decision

Can you say for certain that Kevorkian was obsessed with death or was he attempting to shock 'the senses' into facing another reality? Each person has so many 'sides'...were you witness to all of Kevorkian's, traits? Sometimes, different personality traits, only show up in, out of the way settings. I say this, because it seems that different people perceive me differently and even then...differently, in different settings. And on close examination, I believe that I am not the same with all people. I never had a personal experience with Kevorkian, but i did follow him and his his ideas on assisted sucuide. But, I never believed that he was obsessed with death. From a distance, it appeared that he wanted to assist in releasing another human from his pain/misery. Could he have been more in 'tune' with the pain that some people find themselves in? There was a time that I experienced a 'living hell,' from physical and mental pain. And likely, others have had it much worse. Could his actions have come from the 'obsessed' notion of relieving pain? I have seen documenories, on assisted sucuide, (with Kevorkian, too) for patients with terminal illnesses, after their condition had progressed into unbearable pain. There are assisted suicides, covertly carried out, today, for this very reason. But, much exploring has taken place before making this decision, (which I recall with Kevorkian). It is a slippery slope, for sure! But, can you say for certain that Kevorkian was obsessed with death or pain?

"Johnny Got His Gun" is a novel written in 1938 by American novelist, and later blacklisted screenwriter, Dalton Trumbo. It was made into a movie with Timothy Bottoms playing the lead. Watch it or read the book and then talk about assisted suicide.