People who want it to be a fundamental right argue that The Fifth Amendment provides in particular that no one shall be "deprived of life, liberty or property.” Court has liberty to interpret the constitution and protect the right that are not mentioned in our constitution. For example, our constitution is silent on abortion but Supreme Court created the right to abortion in roe v. wade. Similarly, there is no right to marriage in constitution but the court has created the right, as well as ruled that the ban on antiracial marriage is unconstitutional. People have right to free speech, right to marry, right to abortion as so on. It is agreed that no right is absolute and government can take away any of these rights for legitimate purpose, but if that individual’s right outweighs the governmental interest then the right is a fundamental. The choice between life and death is a deeply personal decision and therefore, prohibition on physician assisted suicide requires a direct incursion of bodily integrity; also, it is inconsistent with society 's basic conception of personal dignity. It can be said that it is not a general right to control the timing and manner of death but it is about right against intrusion which includes constitutional right to refuse life sustaining treatment or restrictions on suicide. A person who is competent and terminally ill has a right to make decision for himself. He has a right to decide when he wants to stop his pain and suffering and embrace a timely and dignified death. The liberty to decide the time for the death outweighs any interests of the government. As Court said in Cruzan that the meaning and completion of someone’s life should be controlled by persons who have his/her best interests at heart not by a state
People who want it to be a fundamental right argue that The Fifth Amendment provides in particular that no one shall be "deprived of life, liberty or property.” Court has liberty to interpret the constitution and protect the right that are not mentioned in our constitution. For example, our constitution is silent on abortion but Supreme Court created the right to abortion in roe v. wade. Similarly, there is no right to marriage in constitution but the court has created the right, as well as ruled that the ban on antiracial marriage is unconstitutional. People have right to free speech, right to marry, right to abortion as so on. It is agreed that no right is absolute and government can take away any of these rights for legitimate purpose, but if that individual’s right outweighs the governmental interest then the right is a fundamental. The choice between life and death is a deeply personal decision and therefore, prohibition on physician assisted suicide requires a direct incursion of bodily integrity; also, it is inconsistent with society 's basic conception of personal dignity. It can be said that it is not a general right to control the timing and manner of death but it is about right against intrusion which includes constitutional right to refuse life sustaining treatment or restrictions on suicide. A person who is competent and terminally ill has a right to make decision for himself. He has a right to decide when he wants to stop his pain and suffering and embrace a timely and dignified death. The liberty to decide the time for the death outweighs any interests of the government. As Court said in Cruzan that the meaning and completion of someone’s life should be controlled by persons who have his/her best interests at heart not by a state