'Encouraging' suicide allowed by US constitution, says Minnesota Supreme Court

[Redfairen]

Source: Christian Science Monitor

The Minnesota Supreme Court on Wednesday reversed the convictions of a former nurse accused of encouraging two people whom he met online to kill themselves.

The court ruled that the language in the state's assisted-suicide law that pertains to "encouraging" suicide is unconstitutional. It violates the right to free speech. However, the court upheld the part of the law that bans "assisting" suicide.

"We conclude that the State may prosecute Melchert-Dinkel for assisting another in committing suicide, but not for encouraging or advising another
to commit suicide. Because the district court did not make a specific finding on whether Melchert-Dinkel assisted the victims’ suicides, we remand for further proceedings consistent with his opinion," wrote Justice G. Barry Anderson in the majority opinion.





Read more: http://m.csmonitor.com/USA/Latest-News-Wires/2014/0319/Encouraging-suicide-allowed-by-US-constitution-says-Minnesota-Supreme-Court

[Hoyt]

1. Interesting, but then I think Jack Kevorkian was a compassionate doctor.

[840high]

2. He was.

[happyslug]

6. Yes, he help you commit sucide even if they was nothing wrong with you.

According to a report by the Detroit Free Press, 60% of the patients who committed suicide with Kevorkian's help were not terminally ill, and at least 13 had not complained of pain.....

In a 2010 interview with Sanjay Gupta, Kevorkian stated an objection to the status of assisted suicide in Oregon, Washington, and Montana. Only in those three states is assisted suicide legal in the United States, and then only for terminally ill patients. To Gupta, Kevorkian stated, "What difference does it make if someone is terminal? We are all terminal."....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Kevorkian

Jack Kevorkian compassion was related to the publicly he obtain in such suicides, remember he also advocated harvesting the organs of prisoner executed in the US.

Kevorkian searched newspapers for the names of condemned criminals appealing their sentences. He wrote them letters. Some wrote back. He besieged prison authorities with requests. All refused to cooperate.

In 1986, Kevorkian learned that doctors in the Netherlands were helping people die, mostly by lethal injection.

"Then I conceived the idea of expanding my death row proposal to include experimentation on willing patients who opt for euthanasia," he wrote.

In a 1986 article in Medicine and Law, Kevorkian proposed euthanasia with few restrictions. He questioned whether psychiatrists should have the right to decide whether mentally ill patients were competent to choose suicide. He outlined a system of centers for death-on-demand, calling them "obitoria.".....

Kevorkian made it clear that his real goal was experimentation, "the extraction of medical benefit from imminent death of people who want to get it." He argued: "The time has come to take a historic step at least in the controlled circumstances I laid out. There's no danger; it's minimal. It's a little experiment. You have absolute control. Try it. If it doesn't work, we quit. Where's the damage?"

http://www.freep.com/article/20070527/NEWS05/70525033

Yes, Jack Kevorkian goal from the time he advocated using prisoners sentence to be executed, through his assistance suicide plans, was always the same to experiment on Humans in ways that Humans would die in the experiment. You can call that compassion, but most people will call that murder.

[Hoyt]

8. Actually, I don't think most people would call that "murder," or that there is anything wrong with

a psychiatrist certifying someone terminally ill is sane enough to spare their family and themselves the pain of dying a horrible death.

You can choose to subject yourself and family to that for whatever reason you like.

The rest of us should have the right to call a Kevorkian disciple to lead us through the necessary evaluations, etc., needed to prove we've made an informed decision. Then, the laws should not require the euthanasia assistant to walk away and leave it all to us.

[happyslug]

10. My point was Kevorkian wanted to experiment of LIVING people, not help them

Worse, he rejected the whole concept that Psychiatrists/Psychologists being involved. His attitude was such review was unneeded if someone wanted to kill themselves, even if there was NOTHING wrong with the person seeking to commit suicide.

I believe juries and the courts would have worked with Kevorkian, except he just wanted to experiment on human beings, if they were terminal or not. He cared less about their Psychological situation, for once they were dead, that ended the problem of what ever psychological problem they had.

Read about Jack Kevorkian, he is NOT someone looking to help terminal patients to end their suffering, he is looking for victims he could experiment on.

[Hoyt]

11. But, however you want to interpret his motives, he did help terminal patients.

[Blue_Tires]

3. This guy ain't a humanitarian:

Melchert-Dinkel, 51, was convicted on two counts of aiding suicide in the deaths of two people: Mark Drybrough, 32, of Coventry, England, who hanged himself in 2005; and Nadia Kajouji, 18, of Brampton, Ontario, who jumped into a frozen river in 2008.

Evidence showed that Melchert-Dinkel sought out depressed people online. When he found them, he posed as a suicidal female nurse, feigned compassion and offered instructions on how they could kill themselves.

Melchert-Dinkel told police he did it for the "thrill of the chase." According to court documents, he acknowledged participating in online chats about suicide with up to 20 people and entering into fake suicide pacts with about 10, five of whom he believed killed themselves.

[Hoyt]

4. I don't believe Kevorkian did anything like that, excepting some ghoulish art work.

[happyslug]

7. No, Jack Kevorkian just wanted to experiment on living humans

http://www.freep.com/article/20070527/NEWS05/70525033

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Kevorkian#cite_note-betzold-15

[JoeyT]

5. Disgusting ruling.

So helping someone that's in pain and wants the pain to stop is discouraged by force of law, but seeking out people that are depressed so you can talk them into killing themselves because it gets you off is free speech instead of depraved-heart murder. Our judiciary is a fucking joke.

[alp227]

9. Local source:

Minneapolis Star Tribune: Case of former Minnesota nurse convicted of urging suicides sent back to lower court

[cosmicone]

12. silly

this means saying, "you should kill yourself" is ok bur saying, "you should od on your rx" is a crime? Becasuse tne latter would be giving assistance with a concrete idea?

I think people should have a right to die in dignity. They can put adequate safeguards but forcing someone to wait for the inevitable while suffering pain is uncoscionable.

[idendoit]

13. Definitely a somewhat odd but clear distinction.

So the conviction stands on it's merits and a spurious argument is denied.