1. Trang chủ
  2. » Văn bán pháp quy

Gale Encyclopedia Of American Law 3Rd Edition Volume 4 P28 pptx

10 402 0
Tài liệu đã được kiểm tra trùng lặp

Đang tải... (xem toàn văn)

THÔNG TIN TÀI LIỆU

Thông tin cơ bản

Định dạng
Số trang 10
Dung lượng 505,79 KB

Các công cụ chuyển đổi và chỉnh sửa cho tài liệu này

Nội dung

On June 26, 1997, the Supreme Court unanimously upheld the right of states to prohibit assisted suicide, holding: 1 asserted right to assistance in committing suicide is not a fundamenta

Trang 1

Ct 2258, 138 L Ed 2d 772, 65 [1997]), three

terminally ill patients, four physicians, and a

nonprofit organization brought action against the

state of Washington for DECLARATORY JUDGMENT,

that a statute banning assisted suicide violated

due process clause On June 26, 1997, the

Supreme Court unanimously upheld the right

of states to prohibit assisted suicide, holding: (1)

asserted right to assistance in committing suicide

is not a fundamental liberty interest protected by

due process clause, and (2) Washington’s ban on

assisted suicide is rationally related to legitimate

government interests In Vacco v Quill (521 U.S

793, 117 S Ct 2293, 138 L Ed 2d 834[1997]),

physicians challenged the constitutionality of

New York statutes making it a crime to aid a

person in committing suicide or attempting to

commit suicide The Supreme Court held that

New York’s prohibition on assisting suicide did

not violate the EQUAL PROTECTION clause of the

FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT

Involuntary Euthanasia

The term involuntary euthanasia is used to

describe the killing of a person who has not

explicitly requested aid in dying This term is

most often used with respect to patients who are

in a persistent vegetative state and who probably

will never recover consciousness

Euthanasia Considerations

Euthanasia is a divisive topic, and different

interpretations of its meaning, practice, and

morality abound Those who favor active

eutha-nasia and a patient’s right to die do not

acknowledge a distinction between active and

passive euthanasia They assert that the

with-drawal of life-sustaining treatment cannot be

distinguished in principle from affirmative steps

to hasten a patient’s death In both situations,

they argue, a person intends to cause the patient’s

death, acts out of compassionate motives, and

causes that single outcome In their view, turning

off a life-sustaining respirator switch and giving a

lethal injection are morally equivalent actions

Opponents of active euthanasia argue that it

undermines the value of, and respect for, all

human life; erodes trust in physicians;

desensi-tizes society to killing; and contradicts many

people’s religious beliefs Moreover, they

main-tain that the intentions and natures of active

and passive euthanasia are not essentially the

same In active euthanasia, a person directly

intends to cause death and uses available means

to achieve this end In passive euthanasia, a person decides against using a certain form of treatment and then directs that such treatment

be withdrawn or withheld, accepting but not intending the patient’s death, which is caused by the underlying illness

While people cite differing reasons for choosing to end their own lives, those suffering from a terminal illness typically state that a serious disorder or disease has adversely affected their quality of life to the point where they no longer wish to continue living Under such circumstances, patients may have been diagnosed with a degenerative, progressive illness such as ALS, Huntington’s disease, multiple sclerosis, AIDS, or Alzheimer’s dis-ease Patients with such illnesses often fear, with good reason, a gradual loss of the quality

of life in the future as the disease or disorder progresses, or they might already have lost a good deal of their independence and thus might require continuous care Some feel that this loss

of autonomy causes an unacceptable loss of personal dignity Others realize that they will be dying in the near future and simply want to have total control over the process Some point out that in addition to physical considerations, they do not want to diminish their assets by incurring large medical costs as their death approaches They feel that they ought to have the option to die sooner and to pass on their assets to their beneficiaries

Some patients who decide that they wish to commit suicide are unable or unwilling to accomplish the act without assistance from their physician Physician-assisted suicide helps them

to die under conditions, and at the time, that they choose PAS is currently legal only in the state of Oregon, under severe restrictions In other states, terminally ill individuals who want

to die must continue living until their body eventually collapses or until a family member or friend commits a criminal act by helping them

to commit suicide

Historical Considerations

Traditional Christian beliefs concerning all forms of suicide were addressed by Thomas Aquinas during the thirteenth century He condemned all suicide (whether assisted or not) on the theory that it violated one’s natural desire to live Among European writers, Michel

de Montaigne was the first major dissenter on this issue During the sixteenth century, he

Trang 2

wrote a series of essays arguing that suicide should be a matter of personal choice, a human right He asserted it is a rational option under certain circumstances

Attempting to commit suicide was once a criminal act It has been decriminalized for many decades in most jurisdictions However, assisted suicide remains a criminal act

Euthanasia and Physician-Assisted Suicide

killing) and physician-assisted

ending the suffering of individuals who

have painful, debilitating, and terminal

diseases These methods are much

de-bated and involve complicated questions

One question concerns whether

indivi-duals in such conditions have the right to

die as they wish rather than live in

persistent agony Other questions have to

do with attending physicians’ roles,

par-ticularly their prescribing certain

medica-tions and giving direcmedica-tions for taking a

lethal dose People wonder if there are

certain circumstances in which a person

ought to help another person commit

suicide These are just some of the

questions that surround the issue of

physician-assisted suicide, a widely

debat-ed ethical issue in modern mdebat-edicine

Physician-assisted suicide is a form of

voluntary euthanasia In other words, it

involves a patient voluntarily acting to end

his or her life Physician-assisted suicide

differs from conventional suicide in that it

is facilitated by a physician who confirms

the patient’s diagnosis, rules out

condi-tions such as depression that may be

finally provides the means for committing

suicide Such action usually consists of

taking a lethal overdose of prescription

KEVORKIANbetween 1990 and 1998 chose to

press a button which delivered a lethal

poison into their veins or to put on a mask

that emitted carbon monoxide into their

lungs As of 2010 ASSISTED SUICIDE was a

felony offense in most states and was also

expressly forbidden in theAMERICAN

MEDI-CAL ASSOCIATION(AMA) Code of Medical

Ethics In 1999, Kevorkian was found

assisted suicide case He was sentenced to serve 10 to 25 years, but was paroled in

2007 after serving eight years in prison

The debate surrounding physician-assisted suicide in the United States has been influenced by medical practices in other countries, particularly the Nether-lands, which legalized both active eutha-nasia and physician-assisted suicide in

2002 Physician-assisted suicide in the Netherlands is conducted within strict guidelines that include the following requirements: the patient’s request for assisted suicide must be voluntary, the patient must be experiencing intolerable suffering, all other alternatives for treat-ment must have been explored, and the physician must consult another indepen-dent physician before proceeding A study commissioned by the Dutch gov-ernment indicated that, in 2001, about 3,500 deaths, or 2.5 percent of the 140,000 death cases that were reported

in the Netherlands that year, occurred by active euthanasia The study, known as the Remmelink Report, defined euthana-sia as the termination of life at the patient’s request Figures also indicated that 300 deaths, or 0.2 percent, were caused by physician-assisted suicide

In the United States, the debate on legalizing assisted suicide began in ear-nest in the 1970s On one side of the debate were patients’ rights groups who lobbied for what they call the right to die—or the right to choose to die, as some have clarified it—of terminally ill patients The strongest opposition to the legalization of physician-assisted suicide has come from physicians’ groups such

as the AMA and from religious groups that are morally opposed to the practice

One person who has done much to make the case for physician-assisted suicide is Derek Humphry, a former journalist who founded the Hemlock Society, in 1980, after witnessing his first wife’s suffering as she was dying from cancer In 2003, the organization changed its name to End-of-Life Choices, which encompasses more clearly the issues supported by its members With a new

Com-passion Control,” the organization con-tinues to advocate for the right of terminally ill people to choose voluntary euthanasia or what Humphry has termed self-deliverance

Humphry has written several books

on the subject of voluntary euthanasia, including Jean’s Way (1978), which recounts his struggle to assist his wife’s death in 1975; Final Exit: The Practicalities

of Self-Deliverance and Assisted Suicide for the Dying (1991), a controversial book that gives detailed advice on how terminally ill people may take their own life; and Lawful Exit: The Limits of Freedom for Help in Dying (1993), which contains Humphry’s own recommendations for legislation that would legalize physician-assisted suicide

Humphry’s words, the “right to choose

to die” is “the ultimate civil liberty.”

physician-assisted suicide as a merciful, dignified option for people whose illness has eroded their quality of life beyond the limits of tolerance He also points out that what he calls beneficent euthanasia occurs every day in medical facilities as physicians make decisions regarding the end of life Others, including some medical ethicists, go so far as to claim that a decision to withhold antibiotics, oxygen, or nutrition from a terminally ill

260 EUTHANASIA

Trang 3

throughout the United States, with

the exception of the state of Oregon In that

state, it is permitted under tightly controlled

conditions

Oregon’s Euthanasia Law

In 1994 voters in the state of Oregon approved

a ballot measure that would have legalized euthanasia under limited conditions Under the

euthanasia than is administering a fatal

dose of morphine Indeed, they see the

common practice of withholding life

support as more open to potential abuse

than the practice of physician-assisted

suicide The former, they argue, is a less

visible, less easily regulated decision

Proponents of physician-assisted suicide

also claim that diseases kill people in far

more cruel ways than would any means

of death that a physician might provide

for an irreversibly ill patient As a result,

they see the action of assisting in suicide

as entirely compatible with the

physi-cian’s duty to the patient

However, Humphry has been an

open critic of Kevorkian’s work He has

described Kevorkian’s theory and

prac-tice of assisted suicide as open-ended

euthanasia Noting Kevorkian’s lack of

precautionary measures such as the use

of waiting periods and second opinions,

Humphry sees any wider application of

Kevorkian’s methods as potentially

lead-ing to abuse and tragedy.“The thinking

people in our movement are appalled by

it,” Humphry said “If you have

Kevor-kian’s type of euthanasia, it will be a

slippery slope Kevorkian’s is a recipe for

skiing down a glacier.”

Detractors of physician-assisted

sui-cide also use the familiar“slippery slope”

argument, proposing that once

physi-cian-assisted suicide is legalized, other

forms of euthanasia will more likely be

practiced as well They see assisted

suicide as potentially leading to situations

in which elderly, chronically ill, and

handicapped people, along with others,

are killed through active, nonvoluntary

euthanasia Related to this idea is the

view that widespread practice of

physician-assisted suicide might claim the lives of

those whose intolerable suffering is

caused by treatable depression They

point out that terminally ill people or

others in pain are often also suffering

from depression and that despite their

illness, their feelings of hopelessness can

often be addressed through means such

as counseling and antidepressant medi-cation

The Catholic Church opposes eutha-nasia and assisted suicide Basing its arguments on passages from the Bible, Catholic theology has for many centuries opposed all forms of suicide Catholicism argues that innocent human life may not

be destroyed for any reason whatsoever

The debate over physician-assisted suicide eventually reached the Supreme Court In 1994 an advocacy group known as Compassion in Dying filed two lawsuits (Compassion in Dying et al v

Washington and Quill et al v Vacco) challenging the constitutionality of state laws banning assisted dying in Washing-ton and New York Compassion in Dying won in the district court in Washington

Chief Judge Barbara Rothstein wrote,

“There is no more profoundly personal decision, nor one which is closer to the heart of personal liberty, than the choice which a terminally ill person makes to end his or her suffering and hasten an inevitable death.” In New York, Com-passion in Dying lost and filed an appeal

in the Second Circuit

ruling was overturned by the NinthCIRCUIT COURT of Appeals, reinstating the anti-suicide law In 1996, however, after reconsideration, the Ninth Circuit Court

of Appeals issued a reversal decision in Compassion v Washington That decision held that assisted dying was protected by liberty and privacy provisions of the U.S

Constitution The majority wrote that

“Those who believe strongly that death must come without physician assistance are free to follow that creed, be they doctors or patients They are not free, however, to force their views, their reli-gious convictions, or their philosophies on all the other members of a democratic society, and to compel those whose values differ with theirs to die painful, protracted, and agonizing deaths.”

In April 1996 the Second Circuit joined the Ninth in recognizing constitu-tional protection for assisted dying in the Quill case, holding that the New York statutes criminalizing assisted suicide vio-late the EQUAL PROTECTION clause of the

FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT However, on June

26, 1997, the U.S Supreme Court reversed both the Ninth and Second Circuit Court

in WASHINGTON V GLUCKSBERG (521 U.S

702, 117 S Ct 2258, 138 L Ed 2d 772 [1997]) and Vacco v Quill (521 U.S 743,

117 S Ct 2293, 138 L Ed 2d 834[1997]) The Court ruled that state laws against assisting a suicide are not

unconstitution-al, but it also stated that patients have a right to aggressive treatment of pain and other symptoms, even if the treatment

“Throughout the Nation, Americans are engaged in an earnest and profound debate about the morality, legality and practicality

of physician assisted suicide Our holding permits this debate to continue, as it should in a democratic society.” However,

in Gonzales v Oregon (546 U.S 243, 126 S

Ct 904, L Ed.[2006]), the Court agreed with the state of Oregon that the federal government could not prosecute doctors who prescribe medications to help their patients commit suicide

Ultimately, then, the voters and representatives of the states and the legal system itself will have to decide whether physician-assisted suicide will be legal-ized Regardless of what side prevails in the debate, the exchange of ideas that it creates may lead to a greater understand-ing of the difficult choices surroundunderstand-ing death in modern times

FURTHER READINGS Cohen-Almagor, Raphael 2001 The Right to Die with Dignity: An Argument in Ethics, Medicine, and Law New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers Univ Press.

Hendin, Herbert 2002 “The Dutch Experi-ence ” Issues in Law & Medicine (spring) CROSS REFERENCES

Death and Dying; Physicians and Surgeons.

Trang 4

Death with Dignity law, a person who sought physician-assisted suicide would have to meet certain criteria:

n The person must be terminally ill.

n The person must have six months or less

to live

n The person must make two oral requests for assistance in dying

n The person must make one written request for assistance in dying

n The person must convince two physicians that he or she is sincere and not acting on a whim and that the decision is voluntary

n The person must not have been influenced

by depression

n The person must be informed of “the feasible alternatives,” including, but not limited to, comfort care, hospice care, and pain control

n The person must wait for 15 days.

Under the proposed law, a person who met all requirements could receive a prescription of a barbiturate that would be sufficient to cause death Physicians would be prohibited from inducing death by injection or carbon monoxide

The NATIONAL RIGHT TO LIFE COMMITTEE, supported by the Roman Catholic Church, obtained a court injunction to delay implemen-tation of the measure The law stalled in the appeals process In the meantime, the measure was not enacted In 1997 there was a second public referendum, and the law was enacted

Within 24 hours of the announcement of the results, state officials had forms for physicians

to record instances of assisted suicide These were later distributed to physicians in the state

The form is entitled“Request for Medication to End My Life in a Humane and Dignified Manner.”

Immediately after the law was affirmed, Thomas Constantine, the administrator of the federal DRUG ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATION (DEA), wrote a policy statement that said that prescribing drugs to help terminally ill patients kill themselves would be a violation of the Controlled Substances Act Nevertheless, on March 26, 1998, a woman in her mid-eighties died from a lethal dose of barbiturates, which had been prescribed by her doctor under the Oregon law She was the first person to publicly use the law to commit suicide She had been

fighting breast cancer for 20 years and recently had been told by her doctor that she had less than two months to live She had been experiencing increased difficulty breathing She made a tape recording in which she stated,“I’m looking forward to it I will be relieved of all the stress I have.” Her personal doctor would not help her end her life, so she turned to an advocacy group, Compassion in Dying That group located a doctor to assist her She fell into

a deep sleep about five minutes after taking the lethal dose of pills, and she died peacefully about 25 minutes later Attorney GeneralJANET RENO officially reversed Constantine’s ruling a few weeks later, stating that doctors who use the law to prescribe lethal drugs to terminally ill patients will not be prosecuted and that drug laws were intended to block illegal trafficking in drugs, not to cover situations like the Oregon suicide law

Despite significant controversy, by the end

of 1998, one prediction of the anti-choice forces had not materialized: There was no rush of people to Oregon to seek an easy end to life While it was predicted that many would take advantage of the law, of the 23 terminally ill individuals who applied to end their own lives

in 1998, 15 committed suicide, usually within a day of receiving the prescription Six died from their illnesses without using the medication Two remained alive at the end of 1998 From

1998 to 2002, 129 people chose physician assisted suicide

In early 2001 Oregon state senator Ron Wyden wrote Attorney General JOHN ASHCROFT asking that theGEORGE W.BUSHadministration not mount an attack on the state law permitting assistance in suicide Ashcroft wrote a letter to Asa Hutchinson, chief of the Drug Enforcement Administration He declared that assisting a terminally ill patient to commit suicide is not a

“legitimate medical purpose” for federally con-trolled drugs He said that physicians who use drugs to help patients die face suspension or revocation of their licenses to prescribe federally controlled drugs This position was contrary to the position taken by Janet Reno, his predeces-sor The attorney general of Oregon, Hardy Myers, quickly initiated a lawsuit to have the Ashcroft directive declared unconstitutional The federal district court in Oregon issued a tempo-rary injunction, which prevents the federal government from enforcing Ashcroft’s

262 EUTHANASIA

Trang 5

interpretation of the Controlled Substances Act

(CSA) The state of Oregon requested that the

court block the federal DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

from taking legal action against Oregon doctors

who prescribe medication to help their patients

commit suicide A federal judge ruled in favor of

the state law in 2002, and the Department of

Justice appealed the decision to the U.S Court of

Appeals for the Ninth Circuit The appeals court

upheld the Oregon law, as did the Supreme

Court in Gonzales v Oregon (546 U.S 243, 126 S

Ct 904, L Ed.[2006]) The Court acknowledged

the federal government has the right to regulate

drugs but stated that the attorney general does

not have the power to regulate the proper uses of

legal medications Moreover, prior CASE LAW

limited the power of the federal government to

regulate medical practice

Other States

According to the online website, Euthanasia

com, 35 states have legislated against assisted

suicide, while nine other states have cited it as a

crime under common law Still more states have

introduced or passed statutes criminalizing

assisted suicide These statutes forbid a person

to knowingly assist or aid another in

commit-ting suicide Some also prohibit solicicommit-ting,

advising, or encouraging another to commit

suicide Some statutes penalize assisted suicide

under guidelines established for murder or

MANSLAUGHTER, whereas others make it a unique

offense with separate penalties Few courts have

interpreted the assisted-suicide statutes, because

prosecutions for assisted suicide are rare In

cases of assisted suicide, a state usually

prose-cutes individuals for murder or manslaughter

The Supreme Court of Ohio, however, ruled in

1996 that assisted suicide is not a crime

FURTHER READINGS

Behuniak, Susan M 2003 Physician-Assisted Suicide: The

Anatomy of a Constitutional Law Issue Lanham, Md.:

Rowman & Littlefield.

Dyck, Arthur J 2001 When Killing Is Wrong:

Physician-Assisted Suicide and the Courts Cleveland, Ohio: Pilgrim

Press.

Euthanasia.com Available online at www.euthanasia.com

(accessed October 11, 2009).

Palmer, Larry I 2000 Endings and Beginnings: Law,

Medicine, and Society in Assisted Life and Death.

Westport, Conn.: Praeger.

CROSS REFERENCE

Death and Dying

vEVARTS, WILLIAM MAXWELL William Maxwell Evarts served as attorney general of the United States during the last year

of the administration of President ANDREW JOHNSON Evarts was a distinguished and power-ful New York attorney who successfully defended President Johnson at hisIMPEACHMENT trial, represented theREPUBLICAN PARTYbefore an electoral commission during the disputed presidential election of 1876, served asSECRETARY

OF STATEduring the administration of President RUTHERFORD B.HAYES, and ended his public career

as a U.S senator

Evarts was born February 16, 1818, in Boston He graduated from Yale University in

1837 and then attended Harvard Law School

He was admitted to the New York bar in 1841 and subsequently established a successful legal practice From 1849 to 1853, Evarts acted as assistant district attorney for the New York District

Evarts entered public service during theU.S CIVIL WAR He participated in diplomatic activi-ties as a member of the Secretary of Defense Committee for the Union In 1863 he went to England as a Union delegate to convince England to stop providing war vessels and equipment to the CONFEDERACY

Following the end of the Civil War, Evarts returned to his law practice He was drawn back to Washington, D.C., in 1868 to help defend President Johnson at his impeachment trial The charges against Johnson were weak and politically motivated, yet the mood in the Senate appeared to favor conviction Evarts proved instrumental in obtaining an acquittal, though

by a margin of only one vote Johnson rewarded Evarts by appointing him attorney general Evarts served in that position until the end of the Johnson administration in March 1869

Evarts then returned to New York govern-ment He led the New York CityBAR ASSOCIATION for ten years and was an advocate for political reform in the city, which was dominated

by the corrupt Democratic political machine led

by the“Tweed Ring.” The ring was named after William Marcy “Boss” Tweed, the New York City DEMOCRATIC PARTYleader who ran the party organization popularly known asTAMMANY HALL Tweed and his associates used their political connections and political offices to gain a foothold in city and county government Once formed, the Tweed Ring misappropriated

Trang 6

government funds through such devices as faked leases, padded bills, false vouchers, unnecessary repairs, and overpriced goods and services bought from suppliers controlled by the ring

In 1876 Evarts reentered the national political arena, this time as the chief counsel

of the national Republican party The presiden-tial election of 1876 between DemocratSAMUEL J TILDEN and Republican Rutherford B Hayes ended in disputes involving the voting returns

of Florida, Louisiana, and South Carolina Two sets of returns were submitted from each of

these states, one favoring Tilden, the other Hayes If Hayes were awarded the electoral votes from these states, and one more from a disputed Oregon elector, he would defeat Tilden in a vote

of 185–184

Congress appointed an electoral commis-sion to decide which returns to accept In the end Evarts and the Republican members of the commission were able to convince commission member and Supreme Court Justice JOSEPH P BRADLEYto cast his vote, which was the deciding vote, for the Hayes electors and Hayes was awarded the presidency Tilden agreed to the result out of fear that violence would ensue if he disputed it In return the Republicans made a side agreement with southern Democrats that led to President Hayes in 1877 removing federal occupation troops from the former states of the Confederacy Evarts was also a key player in these affairs

President Hayes, like President Johnson before him, rewarded Evarts, appointing him secretary of state in 1877 Evarts served in this capacity during the four years of the Hayes administration In 1885 he was elected a U.S senator from New York He served in the Senate until 1889 In failing health he retired from politics and the law in 1891

Evarts died February 28, 1901, in New York City

vEVERS, MEDGAR WILEY Shortly before his death, CIVIL RIGHTS activist MEDGAR WILEY EVERSwas described in the New York Times as the movement’s “quiet integrationist.” Although his contemporaryMARTIN LUTHER KING,

William M Evarts.

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

William Maxwell Evarts 1818–1901

1818 Born, Boston, Mass.

1837 Graduated from Yale University

1861–65 U.S Civil War

1863–64 Served as Union delegate

to England

1841 Admitted to New York bar

1876 Acted as chief counsel for the Republicans

in the Hayes-Tilden electoral battle

1868–69 Served as U.S.

attorney general

1849–53 Served

as assistant district attorney for the New York District

1868 Defended President Andrew Johnson at impeachment trial

1901 Died, New York City

1870–80 Headed the Association

of the Bar of New York City

1873 William "Boss" Tweed convicted of stealing public funds

1877–81 Served as secretary of state 1885–89 Represented New York in the U.S.

Senate

264 EVERS, MEDGAR WILEY

Trang 7

JR., achieved greater fame for organizing

nonvio-lent demonstrations and boycotts, Evers was an

equally dedicated reformer, whose reports of civil

rights abuses in Mississippi helped to force social

and political changes in the Deep South

From 1954 to 1963, Evers was state field

secretary for the National Association for the

ADVANCEMENT of Colored People (NAACP)

Cou-rageous, methodical, and devoted to his work,

Evers sought to dismantle a decades-old system

of SEGREGATION His approach was to create

public outrage over the treatment of African

Americans by documenting cases of brutality

and injustice Although Evers fought tirelessly

against discriminatory laws and conduct, he

rejected violence as a means of improving the

plight of his people

By antagonizing powerful white

suprema-cists, Evers put himself in constant danger in his

home state When he was shot and killed by a

sniper on June 12, 1963, many Mississippians

were not surprised Upon his death, Evers

became an early martyr in the

African-American struggle for equal rights More than

30 years later, when Byron de la Beckwith finally

was convicted of Evers’s ASSASSINATION, Evers

became a symbol of U.S justice—delayed, but

not denied

Evers was born July 2, 1925, in Decatur,

Mississippi, the younger of two sons born to

James Evers, a sawmill worker, and Jessie Evers,

a devout Christian who encouraged young

Medgar to succeed The Evers family was

hardworking but poor Townspeople remember

Evers as an upright, sympathetic young man

who chafed under the inequities of segregation

DuringWORLD WAR II, Evers served in an all–

African-American unit of the U.S Army

Although the military’s racial policies infuriated him, he fought with distinction and was decorated for his bravery in the Normandy Invasion During his tour of duty, Evers experienced in Europe a more tolerant, racially integrated society, which inspired his hope for changes in his native Mississippi

After the war, Evers attended Mississippi’s Alcorn A&M College, where he participated in football, track, debate, and choir He also met

YOU CAN KILL A MAN BUT YOU CAN’T KILL

AN IDEA

—M EDGAR E VERS

Medgar Evers.

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

Medgar Wiley Evers 1925–1963

1925 Born,

Decatur, Miss.

1944 Decorated for bravery after Normandy Invasion

1962 Aided James Meredith in his successful attempt to register at University of Mississippi

1963 Assassinated, Jackson, Miss.; Byron

de la Beckwith charged with murder, but two trials resulted in hung juries

◆ ◆◆

1952 Graduated from Alcorn Agricultural and Mechanical College

1995 Myrlie Evers Williams, Evers's widow, elected head

of NAACP

1961–73 Vietnam War 1939–45

World War II

1950–53 Korean War

1925

1954–63 Served as NAACP field representative in Miss.

1967 Thurgood Marshall became first African American U.S Supreme Court justice

◆ ◆

1958 Arrested for sitting in a "white"

bus seat in Meridian, Mississippi

1971 Public school busing

to achieve integration began

1994 Beckwith convicted

of Evers's death 1990 Beckwith reindicted

Trang 8

his future wife, Myrlie Evers, with whom he had three children After graduation, Evers worked

as a sales agent for Magnolia Mutual, an African-American–owned life insurance com-pany Assigned a rural territory, Evers witnessed African-American poverty and debasement on such a large scale that he could no longer abide Mississippi’s racial discrimination He took a job with the NAACP in 1954, determined to make a difference

As an NAACP field representative, Evers handled routine administrative duties such as setting up chapters, recruiting new members, and collecting dues But more importantly, Evers filed detailed public reports of lynchings, beatings, and other race-related atrocities in Mississippi His work attracted national atten-tion Evers also encouraged voter registration for African Americans and, in some instances, boycotts

Because he signaled the end of the era of white power, Evers was despised by southern bigots He bravely endured their taunts and death threats Organizations opposed to inte-gration, such as the White Citizens Council, branded Evers an enemy Ironically, as African Americans became impatient with the slow pace

of social change, Evers’s work was oversha-dowed by more militant civil rights strategies

On the night of hisMURDER, Evers attended a local rally Around midnight, he returned to his Jackson, Mississippi, home, where an assassin waited for him in nearby honeysuckle bushes

Evers got out of his car and walked up the driveway, carrying shirts that read Jim Crow Must Go, a reference to laws conferring second-class citizenship on African Americans The assassin shot him in the back with an Enfield 30.06 rifle Evers’s wife and their young children, Darrell, Reena, and James, heard the gunshot and rushed to his side Evers could not be saved

As news of Evers’s death spread, riots erupted

in Jackson The nation was stunned by the killing

PresidentJOHN F.KENNEDYdenounced the assassi-nation, sending Evers’s wife his condolences and praising Evers’s devotion to civil rights The FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION(FBI) was called

in to conduct a criminal investigation Evers was buried in Arlington National Cemetery, in Washington, D.C

The trail of the FBI’s investigation led quickly to white supremacist Byron de la Beckwith, a fertilizer sales representative

affiliated with the KU KLUX KLAN Charged with murder, de la Beckwith appeared guilty to most observers, but the racial climate in Mississippi prevented a sure conviction During his trial, de

la Beckwith acted clownish and unrepentant At one point, Mississippi governor Ross Barnett entered the courtroom and hugged the DEFEN-DANT in full view of the all-white jury Despite compelling evidence from the prosecution—de

la Beckwith’s public boasting about the murder, his FINGERPRINTS on the rifle scope, his well-known ability as a marksman, and reports that his white Plymouth Valiant was parked near Evers’s home at the time of the killing—the trial resulted in a hung jury Astonishingly, a second trial also ended in a hung jury

Evers’s widow, who had remarried, refused

to let the matter drop MYRLIE EVERS-WILLIAMS lobbied long and hard to have de la Beckwith tried for a third time for Evers’s killing A third prosecution was possible in this case for two reasons First, there is noSTATUTE OF LIMITATIONS for murder, so the passage of time was not a consideration Second, de la Beckwith had not been exonerated (with a hung jury, the defendant is neither acquitted nor convicted),

so DOUBLE JEOPARDY, the constitutional guaran-tee against multiple prosecutions, was not an issue Evers-Williams’s determination to see justice done, as well as a change in Mississippi politics, made a third trial of de la Beckwith possible

Facing testimony from new and former witnesses, de la Beckwith was reindicted in

1990 A trial was conducted by District Attorney

Ed Peters On February 21, 1994, a jury of eight African Americans and four whites in Hinds County, Mississippi, found de la Beckwith, by then 73 years old, guilty of the 1963 murder of Evers The Mississippi Supreme Court upheld his conviction in 1997 De la Beckwith died in prison in 2001 Although the third trial was a painful experience for Evers-Williams, she was relieved that the Mississippi criminal justice system had finally brought closure to a personal and public tragedy

In life and death, Evers played an impor-tant role in the fight for racial equality He inspired in others, including his family, a commitment to the same social, political, and economic goals for African Americans Evers’s brother, Charles Evers, was elected mayor of

266 EVERS, MEDGAR WILEY

Trang 9

Fayette, Mississippi, in 1969, and ran

unsuc-cessfully for governor of the state in 1971 In

1995, Evers-Williams was elected to head the

NAACP, the organization to which Evers had

dedicated his life

FURTHER READINGS

Evers, Myrlie, with William Peters 1967 For Us, the Living.

Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday.

Evers-Williams, Myrlie and Manning Marable 2005 The

Autobiography of Medgar Evers: A Hero’s Life and Legacy

Revealed Through His Writings, Letters, and Speeches.

New York: Basic Civitas Books.

Massengill, Reed 1994 Portrait of a Racist: The Man Who

Killed Medgar Evers? New York: St Martin’s Press.

Nossiter, Adam 1994 Of Long Memory: Mississippi and the

Murder of Medgar Evers Reading, Mass.:

Addison-Wesley.

CROSS REFERENCES

Civil Rights Movement.

vEVERS-WILLIAMS, MYRLIE

MYRLIE EVERS-WILLIAMS achieved national

promi-nence as the chairwoman of the National

Association for the ADVANCEMENT of Colored

People (NAACP) She was narrowly elected to the

post in 1995 as part of an effort to reform an

organization rocked by scandal and allegations

of financial mismanagement

Evers-Williams was born March 17, 1933, in

Vicksburg, Mississippi She became part of the

modern CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT through her

marriage toMEDGAR EVERS, who was the state field

secretary for the Mississippi NAACP Her world

changed dramatically on June 12, 1963, when her

husband was shot to death outside their home in

Jackson, Mississippi White supremacist Byron de

la Beckwith was charged with theMURDER, but two trials in the 1960s ended in hung juries After the second trial, Evers-Williams vowed to bring de la Beckwith to justice

Following her husband’s ASSASSINATION, Evers-Williams assumed his position as NAACP field secretary Then in 1964 she decided to move with her three young children to Claremont, California, and begin a new life In

1967, she published For Us the Living, a memoir

of her life with her late husband She earned a

Myrlie Evers-Williams.

AP IMAGES

Myrlie Evers-Williams 1933–

1999 Watch Me Fly: What I

Learned on the Way to Becoming the Woman I Was Meant to Be published

1995 Evers-Williams elected chair of NAACP

2005 Published

The Autobiography

of Medgar Evers,

comprised of Medgar’s writings and speeches

1994 De la Beckwith convicted of Medgar Evers's death; sentenced to life

1987–89 Appointed first African American woman to serve

as commissioner

on L.A Board of Public Works

1990

De la Beckwith reindicted

1976 Married Walter Williams

1970 Ran for seat in Congress

1968 Graduated from Pomona College; became director of planning at the Claremont Colleges

1967 For Us the Living published

1954–63 Medgar served as Mississippi's state field secretary of the NAACP

1963 Medgar assassinated in front of their home

in Jackson, Miss.; Byron de la Beckwith charged

1964 Two trials resulted in hung juries;

Evers family moved to California

1951 Married Medgar Evers

1933 Born,

Vicksburg, Miss.

1939–45 World War II

1950–53 Korean War

1961–73 Vietnam War

NEVER LOSE SIGHT

OF YOUR GOALS WE ARE LIVING IN A TIME WHEN WE MUST TAKE INTO OUR HANDS OUR DESTINIES AND OUR FUTURES

—M YRLIE

E VERS -W ILLIAMS

Trang 10

degree in sociology at Pomona College in 1968 and then became director of planning for the Claremont Colleges system

In 1970 she ran for a seat in Congress in what was then the 24th congressional district in California Though she lost the election, it was a turning point for Evers-Williams She was publicly transformed from Mrs Medgar Evers

to Myrlie Evers In the 1970s and 1980s, she worked in the corporate arena, serving as director of consumer affairs for the Atlantic Richfield Company In 1976 she married Walter Williams, a California longshoreman and CIVIL RIGHTSactivist

In 1987 Evers-Willams became the first African American woman to serve on the Los Angeles Board of Public Works She and her husband moved to Bend, Oregon, in 1989

When Mississippi prosecutors failed to try de

la Beckwith a third time for the murder of Medgar Evers, Evers-Williams mounted a cam-paign to generate public opinion in favor of a retrial When she was told that no transcripts of the original trial were to be found, she produced

an original that she had held in a safe deposit box since the 1960s In 1994 her efforts succeeded, and de la Beckwith was convicted of the 1963 crime He was sentenced to life in prison, where

he died in 2001 In 1996, Evers-Williams served

as a consultant to the movie Ghosts of Mississippi, which recounts the story of the retrial and conviction of de la Beckwith Actress Whoopi Goldberg portrays Evers-Williams in the movie

Despite the many changes and activities in her life, Evers-Williams remained committed to the NAACP Serving on the national board of directors in the 1990s, she observed firsthand the problems that were engulfing the once dominant civil rights organization A growing dissatisfaction with the leadership of Executive Director Benjamin F Chavis Jr culminated in August 1994, when he was fired for committing more than $330,000 in NAACP funds, without the board’s approval, to settle aSEX DISCRIMINA-TION suit filed against him The focus then shifted to Chairman William F Gibson, who was also accused of misappropriating NAACP funds for personal use

Evers-Williams was approached to challenge Gibson at the 1995 board election She hesitated

to run because her husband was dying from prostate cancer However, Walter Williams

urged her to take up the fight She was elected

to the chair in February 1995, winning by a one-vote margin; Evers-Williams was the first woman elected to that position Her husband died shortly after her election

The precarious state of the NAACP soon became clear to Evers-Williams Membership had declined from 500,000 to 300,000, while the organization’s debt had risen to over $4 million Corporate support had also dropped, forcing severe staff reductions at the national headquar-ters in Baltimore

Evers-Williams moved quickly to restore trust The board hired an accounting firm to audit financial records and directed its attorney to seek restitution from Gibson Evers-Williams renewed contact with financial contributors, crisscrossing the United States in search of support By the end of 1995, she had substantially reduced the NAACP’s debt New programs were started with the goal of reinvigorating the NAACP and attracting younger members In December 1995, the board approved the appoint-ment of Representative Kweisi Mfume (D-Md.)

as president and executive director, capping a frenetic year for Evers-Williams

Evers-Williams served as chair of the NAACP until 1998 She then began work on the Medgar Evers Institute, headquartered in Jackson, Mis-sissippi, which promotes civil rights and economic development In 2003 the institute partnered with Oregon State University to establish a western regional office in Bend, home of Evers-Williams Evers-Williams continued to be a well-received speaker and author In 1999, she published a memoir, titled Watch Me Fly: What

I Learned on the Way to Becoming the Woman I Was Meant to Be, with Melinda Blau She received numerous honorary degrees and awards, includ-ing the U.S Congressional Black Caucus Achieve-ment Award, the NAACP’s Image Award for Civil Rights, and the Woman of the Year Award from the state of California In March 2003 Evers-Williams visited Mississippi in order to partici-pate in a tribute by the Mississippi Legislature to honor the accomplishments of the late Medgar Evers and Myrlie Williams In 2005 Evers-Williams published The Autobiography of Medgar Evers: A Hero’s Life and Legacy Revealed Through His Writings, Letters, and Speeches As of early

2010, she continued to serve on the board of the NAACP and to live in Bend, Oregon

268 EVERS-WILLIAMS, MYRLIE

Ngày đăng: 06/07/2014, 22:20

TỪ KHÓA LIÊN QUAN

🧩 Sản phẩm bạn có thể quan tâm