Did the Controlled Substances Act authorize the U.S. Attorney General to ban the use of controlled substances for physician-assisted suicide?

Respond to this persons post in 250 words and give your opinions and thoughts.

Did the Controlled Substances Act authorize the U.S. Attorney General to ban the use of controlled substances for physician-assisted suicide?

The Controlled Substances Act was enacted in 1970 to combat drug abuse and to control all traffic of controlled drugs (1). This act allowed the Attorney General to add, remove, or reschedule substances only after findings from the Secretary of Health and Human Services. This act also states that prescriptions must be used for legitimate medical purposes by an individual practitioner actin in the usual course of his professional practice. This act also requires the doctors to register with the attorney general(1). Also the Attorney General may deny, suspend, or revoke a doctors registration if he finds that a doctor is not acting within the public interest. The Oregon Death With Dignity Act was passed in Oregon which exempts licensed physicians from civil or criminal liability. The Attorney General issued an Interpretive rule stating that assisted suicide was not a legitimate medical practice. The ruling was challenged. The distract court enjoined its enforcement. The Ninth Circuit Court invalidated the rule stating that the state did not have the authority as it was a federal offense. The court held that CSA does not allow the Attorney General to prohibit doctors from prescribing regulated drugs for use in doctor assisted suicide under state law that allows the procedure. The courts have held that an administrative interpretation of one own issuing regulation may receive ambiguous statue (2). To answer the question the controlled Substance Act did not authorize the US Attorney General to ban the use of controlled substances for physician assisted suicide as the doctor may see assisted suicide as a legitimate medical procedure.

Did the Court get it right? Why or why not?

Yes, the court did get it right as medical decisions are between the doctor and the patient. The government should not be involved in medical decisions. The state should not get involved with a person personal medical files, findings, or decisions. The government does not want to help pay for medical services but would like to intervene to make health decisions. If the government is not willing to pay for health care thru insurance then how should the government get a say when a person decides to live or die. The choice of life is a personal decision that should be left up to the person making the decision. One argues that the person maybe suffering from depression but if a person has a terminal illness and they are going to die any way a person should be able to choose when and how they die. Also a person should be able to chose how they live. If the government feels that they should be allowed to make this decision then they should have to foot the bill for medical care and or all bills associated with life after the decision has been made and they interfere.

"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Order now and Get 10% Discount! Use Code "GET10" in your order"