hasthe right to end his own life. He will have towait until May 9, 1997 until new arguments will be heard. Hall, whohas been deemed mentally competent, contractedthe virus in 1981 through a blood transfusion. “Some of the complicationshe is encountering from the AIDS virus arearthritis, hepatitis, pneumonia and a brain cyst” (http://www.rights.org/deathnet/open.html). The Oregon Death withDignity Act allows terminally ill adults who are mentally competentto ask for a prescription for medication “for thepurpose of ending his or her life in a humane and dignified manner”(http://www.rights.org/deathnet/open.html). Thisact, “Measure 16,” was approved by the voters in 1994. “Renewed effortsat the Legislative level to overturn“Measure 16” may now be anticipated to prevent the law from being used”(http://www.rights.org/deathnet/open.html). In June, 1990, the Supreme Court decided that the parents of32 year old Nancy Beth Cruzan, who had beenin a car accident and in what Doctor’s called a vegetative state forseven years, could not end her treatment. Later thatsame year, a Missouri Court ruled that the feeding tube could be removedafter evidence that Cruzan would wish toterminate the treatment was proven. “Nancy Beth Cruzan died twelvedays later”(Death and Dying,26).The First Amendment gives one the right to demand the correction ofan injustice. Would one not consider a terminalillness an injustice? Charles Hall contracted this deadly disease froma blood transfusion not from shooting drugs orhaving unprotected sex. So wouldn’t Hall be entitled to have this injusticecorrected? The Fourteenth Amendmentgives one the right to life, liberty, or property, without due processof law. However, is living with complications froma terminal illness, so severe that one is unable to function independently,life? The government says that it is. Liberty isfreedom, but is having c...
