Baxter v. Montana

Last updated

Baxter, et al., v. Montana, et al.
Seal of the Supreme Court of Montana.gif
CourtMontana Supreme Court
Full case nameRobert Baxter, Stephen Speckart, M.D., C. Paul Loehnen, M.D., Lar Autio, M.D., George Risi Jr., M.D., and Compassion & Choices, Plaintiffs and Appellees, v. State of Montana and Steve Bullock, Defendants and Appellants
ArguedSeptember 2 2009
DecidedDecember 31 2009
Citation(s)MT DA 09-0051, 2009 MT 449
Holding
While the State Constitution did not guarantee a right to physician-assisted suicide, there was "nothing in Montana Supreme Court precedent or Montana statutes indicating that physician aid in dying is against public policy."
Court membership
Judge(s) sitting
Chief Justice
Mike McGrath (recused)
Associate Justices
James C. Nelson, W. William Leaphart, Patricia O. Cotter, James A. Rice, John Warner, Brian Morris
Justice Pro Tem
District Judge Joe L. Hegel (sitting in place of McGrath)
Case opinions
MajorityLeaphart, joined by Cotter, Warner, Morris
DissentRice, joined by Hegel

Baxter v. Montana, is a Montana Supreme Court case, argued on September 2, 2009, and decided on December 31, 2009, that addressed the question of whether the state's constitution guaranteed terminally ill patients a right to lethal prescription medication from their physicians. [1] [2] The Montana Supreme Court sidestepped the question of if medical aid in dying is guaranteed under Montana State Constitution, but it instead ruled, on narrower grounds, that neither legal precedent nor the state's statute deem such assistance to be against public policy or illegal. [3] Montana is one of ten states in which aid in dying is authorized. The others are California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington; it is authorized in the District of Columbia as well. [4] [5]

Contents

Background of the case

The original lawsuit was brought by four Montana physicians (Stephen Speckart, C. Paul Loehnen, Lar Autio, and George Risi, Jr., M.D.s), Compassion & Choices and Robert Baxter, a seventy-six-year-old truck driver from Billings, Montana, who was dying of lymphocytic leukemia. The plaintiffs asked the court to confirm a constitutional right "to receive and provide aid in dying". [6] The state argued that "the Constitution confers no right to aid in ending one’s life." [2] Judge Dorothy McCarter, of Montana's First Judicial District Court, ruled in favor of the plaintiffs on December 5, 2008, stating that the "constitutional rights of individual privacy and human dignity, taken together, encompass the right of a competent terminally-ill patient to die with dignity." [7] Baxter died that same day. [8]

The Montana Attorney General appealed the case to the state supreme court. Oral arguments were heard on September 2, 2009. [8]

Amicus briefs filed on behalf of those asking the court to grant the constitutional right to receive/provide aid in dying include human rights groups, [9] women's rights groups, [10] The American Medical Women's Association/American Medical Students Association, [11] clergy, [12] legal scholars, [13] thirty-one Montana state legislators [14] and bioethicists, [15] among others.

Among the groups filing amicus briefs on behalf of the state were the Alliance Defense Fund on behalf of the Family Research Council, Americans United for Life, the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, disability rights group Not Dead Yet, [16] and the Catholic Medical Association.

The Montana Medical Association issued a statement opposing physician-assisted suicide, but refused to file an amicus brief in the appeal.

Opinion

On Dec. 31, 2009, the Montana Supreme Court ruled in favor of Baxter. Although they did not address the constitutional question, they ruled on narrower grounds saying that "nothing in Montana Supreme Court precedent or Montana statutes indicating that physician aid in dying is against public policy." [17]

After Baxter

Since the Montana Supreme Court chose only to rule on statutory grounds, groups opposed to medical aid in dying have since tried to overturn the decision at the legislature. Likewise proponents of aid in dying have sought to have the detailed provisions found in other states codified. [18]

In 2013, Montana Doctor Eric Kress, M.D. became the first physician to speak publicly about providing aid in dying for qualified patients who request the medication. [18] In 2015, Erwin Byrnes became the first patient to speak publicly about his plans to take the medication, saying “We have to be kind of the driver of our own bus.” [19]

In 2015, The Journal of Palliative Medicine published the article "Clinical Criteria for Physician Aid in Dying" for doctors to use as guidance in states like Montana, where provisions are not detailed in statute. [20]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Assisted suicide</span> Suicide undertaken with aid from another person

Assisted suicide is suicide undertaken with the aid of another person. The term usually refers to physician-assisted suicide (PAS), which is suicide that is assisted by a physician or another healthcare provider. Once it is determined that the person's situation qualifies under the physician-assisted suicide laws for that location, the physician's assistance is usually limited to writing a prescription for a lethal dose of drugs.

The right to die is a concept based on the opinion that human beings are entitled to end their life or undergo voluntary euthanasia. Possession of this right is often understood that a person with a terminal illness, incurable pain, or without the will to continue living, should be allowed to end their own life, use assisted suicide, or to decline life-prolonging treatment. The question of who, if anyone, may be empowered to make this decision is often the subject of debate.

Measure 16 of 1994 established the U.S. state of Oregon's Death with Dignity Act, which legalizes medical aid in dying with certain restrictions. Passage of this initiative made Oregon the first U.S. state and one of the first jurisdictions in the world to permit some terminally ill patients to determine the time of their own death.

Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health, 497 U.S. 261 (1990), was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States involving a young adult incompetent. The first "right to die" case ever heard by the Court, Cruzan was argued on December 6, 1989, and decided on June 25, 1990. In a 5–4 decision, the Court affirmed the earlier ruling of the Supreme Court of Missouri and ruled in favor of the State of Missouri, finding it was acceptable to require "clear and convincing evidence" of a patient's wishes for removal of life support. A significant outcome of the case was the creation of advance health directives.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Suicide legislation</span> Laws concerning suicide around the world

Suicide is a crime in some parts of the world. However, while suicide has been decriminalized in many western countries, the act is stigmatized and discouraged. In other contexts, suicide could be utilized as an extreme expression of liberty, as is exemplified by its usage as an expression of devout dissent towards perceived tyranny or injustice which occurred occasionally in cultures such as ancient Rome, medieval Japan, or today's Tibet Autonomous Region.

Washington v. Glucksberg, 521 U.S. 702 (1997), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court, which unanimously held that a right to assisted suicide in the United States was not protected by the Due Process Clause.

Wesley J. Smith is an American lawyer and author, a Senior Fellow at the Discovery Institute's Center on Human Exceptionalism, a politically conservative, pseudoscientific, non-profit think tank. He is also a consultant for the Patients Rights Council. Smith is known for his criticism of animal rights, environmentalism, assisted suicide and utilitarian bioethics. He is also the host of the Humanize podcast.

Euthanasia is currently illegal in all 50 states of the United States. Assisted suicide is legal in 10 jurisdictions in the US: Washington, D.C. and the states of California, Colorado, Oregon, Vermont, New Mexico, Maine, New Jersey, Hawaii, and Washington. The status of assisted suicide is disputed in Montana, though currently authorized per the Montana Supreme Court's ruling in Baxter v. Montana that "nothing in Montana Supreme Court precedent or Montana statutes [indicates] that physician aid in dying is against public policy."

Vacco v. Quill, 521 U.S. 793 (1997), was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States regarding the right to die. It ruled 9–0 that a New York ban on physician-assisted suicide was constitutional, and preventing doctors from assisting their patients, even those terminally ill and/or in great pain, was a legitimate state interest that was well within the authority of the state to regulate. In brief, this decision established that, as a matter of law, there was no constitutional guarantee of a "right to die."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Legality of euthanasia</span>

The legality of euthanasia varies depending on the country. Efforts to change government policies on euthanasia of humans in the 20th and 21st centuries have met limited success in Western countries. Human euthanasia policies have also been developed by a variety of NGOs, most notably medical associations and advocacy organizations. As of 2023, euthanasia is legal in Belgium, Canada, Colombia, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Portugal, Spain and all six states of Australia. Euthanasia was briefly legal in the Northern Territory between 1996 and 1997, but was overturned by a federal law. In 2021, a Peruvian court allowed euthanasia for a single person, Ana Estrada.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Kathryn Tucker</span>

Kathryn Tucker is an American attorney and the executive director of the End of Life Liberty Project, which she founded during her tenure as executive director of the Disability Rights Legal Center. This appointment to the DRLC was opposed by every other major disability rights group and has since been terminated. She graduated from Georgetown University Law Center in 1985 and Hampshire College in 1981. Tucker has been an adjunct law professor at Lewis and Clark School of Law, Seattle University the University of Washington, Loyola/LA and Hastings. Beginning in 1990, while an attorney at the Seattle firm of Perkins Coie, she did pro bono work for Washington Citizens for Death with Dignity, which led her into the movement to legalize physician assisted suicide.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Washington Death with Dignity Act</span> Ballot measure in Washington legalizing some assisted suicide

Initiative 1000 (I-1000) of 2008 established the U.S. state of Washington's Death with Dignity Act, which legalizes medical aid in dying with certain restrictions. Passage of this initiative made Washington the second U.S. state to permit some terminally ill patients to determine the time of their own death. The effort was headed by former Governor Booth Gardner.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Assisted suicide in the United States</span> Medically-induced suicide with help from another person

Assisted suicide is suicide with the aid of another person. In the United States, the term "assisted suicide" is typically used to describe what proponents refer to as medical aid in dying, in which terminally ill adults are prescribed and self-administer barbiturates if they feel that they are suffering significantly. The term is often used interchangeably with physician-assisted suicide (PAS), "physician-assisted dying", "physician-assisted death", "assisted death" and "medical aid in dying" (MAiD).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Euthanasia in Canada</span>

Euthanasia in Canada in its legal voluntary form is called medical assistance in dying (MAiD) and it first became legal along with assisted suicide in June 2016 to allow terminally ill adults to control their deaths. In March 2021, the law was further amended by Bill C-7 which permits assisted euthanasia in additional situations, including for people with disabilities and chronic diseases. In 2021, more than 10,000 people died by euthanasia in Canada.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Joseph Arvay</span> Canadian lawyer (1949–2020)

Joseph James Arvay, was a Canadian lawyer who argued numerous landmark cases involving civil liberties and constitutional rights.

Gloria Taylor was a Canadian who was an advocate of medically-assisted dying and suffered from Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), also known as Lou Gehrig's disease. Taylor began to experience the early symptoms of ALS in 2003. A neurologist diagnosed her disease in 2009.

<i>Carter v Canada (AG)</i> Decision of the Supreme Court of Canada

Carter v Canada (AG), 2015 SCC 5 is a landmark Supreme Court of Canada decision where the prohibition of assisted suicide was challenged as contrary to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms ("Charter") by several parties, including the family of Kay Carter, a woman suffering from degenerative spinal stenosis, and Gloria Taylor, a woman suffering from amyotrophic lateral sclerosis ("ALS"). In a unanimous decision on February 6, 2015, the Court struck down the provision in the Criminal Code, thereby giving Canadian adults who are mentally competent and suffering intolerably and enduringly the right to a doctor's assistance in dying. This ruling overturned the Supreme Court's 1993 ruling in Rodriguez v British Columbia (AG), which had denied a right to assisted suicide.

Act 39 of 2013 established the U.S. state of Vermont's Patient Choice and Control at End of Life Act, which legalizes medical aid in dying with certain restrictions. Vermont was the first state to enact this Law through legislative action; it permits some terminally ill patients to determine the time of their own death.

California End of Life Option Act is a law enacted in June 2016 by the California State Legislature which allows terminally ill adult residents in the state of California to access medical aid in dying by self-administering lethal drugs, provided specific circumstances are met. The law was signed in by California governor Jerry Brown in October 2015, making California the fifth state to allow physicians to prescribe drugs to end the life of a terminally ill patient, often referred to as physician-assisted suicide.

<i>Planned Parenthood v. Rounds</i>

Planned Parenthood v. Rounds, 686 F.3d 889, is an Eighth Circuit decision addressing the constitutionality of a South Dakota law which forced doctors to make certain disclosures to patients seeking abortions. The challenged statute required physicians to convey to their abortion-seeking patients a number of state-mandated disclosures, including a statement that abortions caused an "[i]ncreased risk of suicide ideation and suicide." Planned Parenthood of Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, along with its medical director Dr. Carol E. Ball, challenged the South Dakota law, arguing that it violated patients' and physicians' First Amendment free speech rights and Fourteenth Amendment due process rights. After several appeals and remands, the Eighth Circuit, sitting en banc, upheld the South Dakota law, holding that the mandated suicide advisement was not "unconstitutionally misleading or irrelevant," and did "not impose an unconstitutional burden on women seeking abortions or their physicians." This supplemented the Eighth Circuit's earlier rulings in this case, where the court determined that the state was allowed to impose a restrictive emergency exception on abortion procedures and to force physicians to convey disclosures regarding the woman's relationship to the fetus and the humanity of the fetus.

References

  1. Baxter v. State, 2009 MT 449 [ permanent dead link ], 224 P.3d 1211, 354 Mont. 234 (2009).
  2. 1 2 Johnson, Kirk (August 31, 2009). "Montana Court to Rule on Assisted Suicide Case" via NYTimes.com.
  3. Johnson, Kirk (December 31, 2009). "Montana Ruling Bolsters Doctor-Assisted Suicide". The New York Times. ISSN   0362-4331 . Retrieved December 30, 2016.
  4. "Colorado medical-aid-in-dying law signed, takes effect immediately" . Retrieved December 30, 2016.
  5. "New Jersey legalizes medically assisted dying" . Retrieved July 10, 2019.
  6. Original plaintiff's filing Baxter v Montana [ permanent dead link ]
  7. [ dead link ]
  8. 1 2 Bureau, MIKE DENNISON Gazette State. "Personal choice vs. public interest: 'Right to die' argued". The Billings Gazette.
  9. "Human Rights Groups Amicus for plaintiffs/appellees" (PDF).[ permanent dead link ]
  10. "Women's Rights Groups Amicus for plaintiffs/appellees" (PDF).[ permanent dead link ]
  11. "American Medical Women's Association/American Medical Students Association Amicus Brief for plaintiffs/appellees" (PDF).[ permanent dead link ]
  12. "Clergy Amicus Brief for plaintiffs/appellees" (PDF).[ permanent dead link ]
  13. [ dead link ]
  14. "Montana Legislators Amicus Brief for plaintiffs/appellees" (PDF).[ permanent dead link ]
  15. "Bioethicists Amicus Brief for plaintiffs/appellees" (PDF).[ permanent dead link ]
  16. "Info" (PDF). notdeadyet.org. 2012. Retrieved June 1, 2019.
  17. Johnson, Kirk (December 31, 2009). "Montana Ruling Bolsters Doctor-Assisted Suicide" via NYTimes.com.
  18. 1 2 Span, Paula. "In Montana, New Controversy Over Physician-Assisted Suicide". The New Old Age Blog. Retrieved December 30, 2016.
  19. Briggeman, Kim. "Longtime Missoula educator Erwin Byrnes charted his own course, even in death". missoulian.com. Retrieved December 30, 2016.
  20. Orentlicher, David; Pope, Thaddeus Mason; Rich, Ben A.; Committee, Physician Aid-in-Dying Clinical Criteria. "Clinical Criteria for Physician Aid in Dying". Journal of Palliative Medicine. 19 (3): 259–262. doi:10.1089/jpm.2015.0092. PMC   4779271 . PMID   26539979.