This paper will discuss the state of Florida with regard to the issue of whether an individual has the "right to die." The first part of the paper will define the issue in terms of social welfare policy. The second part of the paper will summarize the present state of Florida law, including provisions concerning surrogate issues. The third part of the paper will describe the historical development of Florida law in this area, focusing on the relationship between case law and statutory developments. The last part of the paper will briefly discuss the adequacy of current Florida law.
The question of whether or not a person has a "right to die" by refusing treatment which would prolong or sustain his or her life is a very controversial one. Lawmakers and judges have said that such a right emanates from the basic right of privacy. This translates into a right to refuse medical treatment. The Florida legislature has said that while this right is a fundamental one it "is subject to certain interests of society, such as the protection of human life and the preservation of ethical standards in the medical profession" (Fla. Stat. ยง 765.102(1)). This shows the basic tension between personal rights of autonomy and societal interests. The most common argument against recognizing a right to die is that it would create a "slippery slope" leading to the elimination of persons who cannot function as useful members of society.
The problem with refusing to recognize a right to refuse life-prolonging treatment is that it condemns the patient to suffering without any real hope of recovery. The suffering of the patient usually includes not only physical pain but also the psychological suffering resulting from the knowledge that he or she is a burden on family and society. In addition, there is the problem of the incompetent patient. Such a person is unable to make an autonomous decision about ending life-prolonging treatment but conti...