Analysis Of At Catholic Hospitals, But Not A Right To Death By Katherine Stewart

Federal law and religious law often conflict. As they do, the question of who is correct arises. In, At Catholic Hospitals, a ‘Right to Life’ but Not a Right to Death by Katherine Stewart, it explains how Catholic hospitals refuse to take part in “Die with Dignity’. This issue is dominant as the broader, law abiding culture agrees and in fact voted for the death-with-dignity act, but the tight knit culture of Catholicism will not abide by the law because it defies their religious beliefs. This illustrates two cultures can be on polar ends of an argument and both believe they are morally correct because of their cultural influences. The Die with Dignity Act was introduced into the United States in 2009 in Oregon. Since then, Washington, Montana, Vermont, and most recently California have also legalized it. The Die with Dignity Act allows “physicians to prescribe lethal doses of medication, so …show more content…
However the patient must meet a list of requirements and go through a psychological evaluation first. This ensures they are mentally capable of making the decision to medically end their life. Though legalized, “Catholic hospitals have long taken the position that they will not provide medical services that contradict Catholic religious principles” and doctors within religious hospitals have used the term ‘gagged’ to “describe their inability… to share important information with their patients about their rights” (Stewart, 2015). The general culture has evolved to seeing dying with dignity as a respectable act. In contradiction, regardless of state law, the Catholic hospitals will not perform what is culturally unacceptable to them. One might point out there are more options than just