The bill stipulates that withholding or withdrawing medical treatment would not constitute assisted suicide. Other pending Michigan legislation would give a competent, terminally ill adult the right to end unbearable pain or suffering through self-administering medication to hasten death, but the measure could take effect unless approved by a majority voting in the November 1998 general election. Pursuant to the recommendation of the former Commission on Death and Dying, this legislation includes strict guidelines. On the one hand, many religious and other public leaders who oppose assisted suicide argue that it is immoral on the ground that life is an irreplaceable gift that should not be destroyed by any unnatural act. Apart from assisted suicide's moral and philosophical implications, many support or oppose the practice for practical reasons.
Opponents argue that unbearable pain and suffering result from medical mismanagement of pain.
They believe that physicians and other caregivers are unduly concerned about a patient's becoming addicted to painkilling drugs, and some physicians are not up to date on the most modern techniques available to control pain. Supporters, believe, however, that doctors should at least be able to choose whether they will participate. Opponents also insist that there are significant social issues to be considered. For example, they fear that poor or unsophisticated patients could be pressured to request assisted suicide to save money or on the ground that their life has minimal social value. In countering these arguments, supporters suggest that safeguards against improprieties can be built into legislation permitting assisted suicide.