Pain medication and end-of-life decisions

Re “In the end, peace of mind,” Opinion, Sept. 25

It must be pointed out that no reasonable human would oppose treating someone for pain. There is nothing morally wrong with giving someone morphine to bring pain under control. If death results, it is an unintended consequence. However, giving someone morphine, or worse yet poison, to bring about death is morally wrong. Simply put, it is murder.

We live in the wealthiest country in the history of the world, and the best we can offer the dying is to kill them? Should we not instead be offering compassion, care and, yes, medicine to alleviate their suffering instead of ending their lives?

NOEL D’ANGELO

Thousand Oaks

*

Betty Rollin is right that the debate about Oregon’s Death With Dignity Act should not be about politics or religion but control. That is: Who should control one’s death -- the government, the church or the individual?

There is no compelling argument for government interference in end-of-life decisions. The choice is not imposed or coerced; it does not infringe upon another’s person or property. And the religious arguments are a matter of faith, and as such belong outside the courts.

America was founded on the belief that individuals have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That guarantee should apply equally when one determines, rationally, that the best chance for happiness lies on the other side of life.

ROBERT J. INLOW

Charlottesville, Va.