The following Commentary column was published in the April 13, 1998 Wall Street Journal. An earlier Oregon version was published in The Oregonian newspaper on March 3, 1998.

Don't Subsidize Assisted Suicide

My wife, Janet, was Jack Kevorkian's first patient in 1990. When she decided to end her life, we flew from our home state of Oregon seeking Dr. Kevorkian's help. Her act was a landmark in the debate over doctor-assisted suicide in this country. I supported her decision, and I have worked ever since to help make sure others have the choice to seek help when they choose.

No state legally permitted doctor-assisted suicide until 1994, when Oregon voters approved the Death With Dignity Act. I was an ardent supporter of the act, and was heartened when Oregonians decisively reaffirmed their choice last year by voting down an attempt to overturn it.

This February, however, Oregon government took a step that could have been predicted but never should have happened. The Oregon Health Services Commission voted to include physician-aided death on the list of health services available to Oregon's Medicaid clients. The Oregon Health Plan seeks to ration health care to the poor by listing available procedures and assigning a level of priority to each.

I've always questioned the wisdom of letting government make such decisions for the poor, or anyone else for that matter. In the case of assisted suicide, the government's involvement is particularly disturbing. Many people believe suicide, in any form, is morally wrong. I disagree — but I also believe that to force such people to pay for my choice, or yours, is morally wrong. Voter approval of assistance in dying should not give anyone a moral claim on your tax dollars to pay for that assistance.

During last year's campaign to reverse the Death With Dignity Act, my side ran ads saying, "Don't let them shove their religion down your throat." Now it's my side shoving our moral beliefs down opponents' throats — and it's just as wrong. This is the trouble with letting government make such decisions in the first place. Suddenly, the right to die turns into a taxpayer duty to help someone die.

I hasten to add that I do have compassion for those without the financial means to carry out their own choice. Groups such as the Hemlock Society and Compassion in Dying of Oregon — both strong supporters of assisted suicide — might find ways to help the poor in this personal choice. Churches that take a liberal view of doctor-assisted suicide as well as other voluntary groups might also offer assistance.

Portland, Ore. pollster Tim Hibbitts recognized during last year's campaign that the strong voter support for assisted suicide was coming not so much from a liberal perspective as from a libertarian one. The difference is important. At the risk of oversimplification, liberals often want not only the freedom to make choices like abortion and assisted suicide, but also the ability to force others to pay for those choices. Libertarians generally recognize the same freedoms, but oppose forcing anyone else to pay for them. That's what freedom is about — making your own choices and taking responsibility for them.

Opponents of assisted suicide keep talking about the "slippery slope." Grant even a limited right to assisted suicide, they argue, and pretty soon that right will expand. Sadly, this decision to fund assisted suicide for poor people through other people's taxes has expanded the government's involvement in an issue that ought to be a matter of personal conscience and choice. The impulse to do good through government may end up setting back the cause of doctor-assisted suicide.

I don't know how to reverse the decision to fund doctor-assisted suicide through the Oregon Health Plan. It's a totally politicized process now. It will strengthen the antichoice voices. It will deflect the debate away from how best to help people make their own choices. Sadly, it will also make poor people pawns in this debate.

Dr. Kevorkian doesn't charge for his services, and Janet could afford to travel out of state seeking help to end her life. But even if she hadn't been able to afford the trip, Janet would not have tried to force others to pay for her choice. To do so would have violated her fundamental belief that we own our own bodies, and no one has the right to control us or make us pay for the decisions of others.