The present research paper will focus on the complicated question of the euthanasia legalization, legal cases that were subject of the USA courts, and main arguments of the public discussion. The raise of interest to the euthanasia occurred in 1990’s after Netherlands legalized the physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia (with a strict guideline that should be followed). According to the 2nd Edition of the West’s Encyclopedia of American Law euthanasia is defined as the action of killing the terminally ill person that is unconscious and in order to stop the person’s suffering (Lehman). The physician-assisted suicide (pas) differs as it is classified like actions made by the person himself, but when a physician makes available means for causing death. According to the more detailed classification pas relates to the voluntary passive euthanasia (Meisel).Euthanasia in USA is not permitted, but there were a number of efforts to overcome this regulation and it was reflected in the cases presented below.
The main argument is whether the adult person has the so-called “right to die” being in a conditions of the terminally ill. Is it a constitutional right and whether this prohibition violates the mentioned right? The discussion in states was so active that the Congress prepared The Patient Self-determination Act, 1990 (Salatka). The general purpose of the Act was to fix the ability of patient to refuse from medical treatment, but according to the state’s law. Besides, it was mentioned that physicians should provide the complete and honest information to the patient for preventing taking an incompetent decision. The Act, however, did not serve a lot as the euthanasia was still legally unexplained. The Wons v. Public Health Trust could be considered the first one that touched the question of the “right to die”. It relates to the story of Won, the women that being conscious and in critical situation for her life refused from blood transfusion because of her religious beliefs. The Public Health Trust referred to the court and the last one ordered to make transfusion, but this already happened when the women was unconscious.
The reason why the court took this decision was based on the children care of this woman. Her responsibility like a mother and the children’s right to have both parents alive valued for court more than her personal choice to finish her life. This was a legal protection of the innocent third parties. The next resonance case relating to the right to take decision about voluntary death is about Cruzan v. Harman. This situation is about women that after a car incident lived in a vegetable state during eight years. However, her illness was not terminally in spite of the hydration and nutrition systems that were connected to her body. Her parents got permission of the court that could remove those systems and therefore cause the death. The following process Cruzan v. Director argued that the will of the …