Washington Doctor Alerts Senators to "Expansion" Issue

Dear Senate Judiciary Committee:

I am doctor in Washington State where assisted suicide is legal for “terminal patients” predicted to have less than six months to live.  I write to alert you to our “expansion” issue.

Our law has been in effect for just four years.  We have, however, already had proposals to expand that law to direct euthanasia of non-terminal people.  See e.g., Brian Faller, "Perhaps it's time to expand Washington's Death with Dignity Act", November 16, 2011.  Last year, there was also this article in the Seattle Times, suggesting euthanasia for people who cannot afford their own care, which would be involuntary euthanasia:  Jerry Large, "Planning for old age at a premium," March 8, 2012 at http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/text/2017693023.html ("After Monday's column,  . . . a few [readers] suggested that if you couldn't save enough money to see you through your old age, you shouldn't expect society to bail you out.  At least a couple mentioned euthanasia as a solution.")  (Emphasis added).

I am concerned with where this is going.  I hope that Montana protects its citizens by enacting HB 505.

Richard Wonderly, MD
Seattle Washington

"This ad is appalling, even by the low standards of Compassion & Choices"

Dear Judiciary Members:

I am a probate attorney from Washington State where assisted suicide is, unfortunately, legal.

I recently saw an ad by “Compassion and Choices” which contained an over-the-top depiction of a doctor in handcuffs.  This ad is appalling, even by the low standards of Compassion in Choices.  (Compassion and Choices is a successor organization of the Hemlock Society, originally founded by Derek Humphry.  In 2011, Humphry was keynote speaker and Compassion and Choices annual meeting here in Washington.  He was also in the news as a promoter of mail-order suicide kits after a 29 year old man used one of the kits to commit suicide).*

HB 505 is needed to protect seniors and others from the ultimate in financial and physical abuse.  I urge you to vote YES.  Thank you.

Theresa Schrempp

Seattle, WA   

*  For supporting authority and more information, go here: http://www.montanansagainstassistedsuicide.org/2012/12/compassion-choices-is-successor.html

"Legalizing assisted suicide results in causing non-dying persons to be steered to suicide" - Support HB 505

Dear Members of the Montana State Senate Judiciary Committee,

I am writing in support of HB 505, which would clarify that physician-assisted suicide is not legal in Montana.

I am a doctor in Oregon, one of two states where assisted-suicide is legal. My personal experience in Oregon has shown me that legalizing assisted suicide results in causing non-dying persons to be steered to suicide.

Oregon’s assisted-suicide law applies to patients predicted to have less than six months to live. In 2000, I had a cancer patient named Jeanette Hall. Another doctor had given her a terminal diagnosis of six months to a year to live. This was based on her not being treated for cancer.

At our first meeting, Jeanette told me that she did not want to be treated, and that she wanted to opt for what our law allowed – to kill herself with a lethal dose of barbiturates.  She informed me that she had voted for assisted suicide, and that is what she wanted. 

I did not and do not believe in assisted suicide. I informed her that her cancer was treatable and that her prospects were good. But she told me she didn't want the treatment, she wanted “the pills.” She had made up her mind, but she continued to see me weekly.  On the third or fourth visit, I asked her about her family and learned that she had a son. I asked her how he would feel if she went through with her plan. Shortly after that, she agreed to be treated, and her cancer was cured.

Five years later she saw me in a restaurant and said, “Dr. Stevens, you saved my life!”  She realized that if I had believed in assisted suicide, that she would not have enjoyed her past 5 years.  She is now alive and enjoying life over 12 years since her cancer diagnosis and successful treatment.

For her, the mere presence of legal assisted suicide had steered her to suicide.

I understand that you will be considering HB 505 next week.  I encourage you to be aware of the dangers of assisted suicide, and that you will do your part to keep it out of Montana.  Please vote yes on HB 505.

Sincerely, 

Kenneth Stevens, MD,
Professor Emeritus, Radiation Oncology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon

Not Dead Yet Supports HB 505

Dear Senate Judiciary Committee Member:

Not Dead Yet is a national disability rights group with members in Montana.  On behalf of our members, I write to say that we urge you to pass HB 505, which is a short and simple bill to prevent legalization of assisted suicide and end the dispute over whether it is legal in Montana.

In the last two years, three other states have strengthened their laws against assisted suicide (Idaho, Georgia and Louisiana).  Not Dead Yet of Georgia was involved in the Georgia efforts.  We met with a woman, Sue Celmer, whose ex-husband had been assisted to commit suicide by Final Exit Network.  He had previously battled cancer, but was cancer free when these suicide predators assisted him.  Her story helped convey the urgency of legislation banning assisted suicide.   We hope that Montana will join Georgia and the other two states to protect older people, our families and ourselves.

Why HB 505 is Needed Now

By Margaret Dore, Esq.

A.  Baxter is Confusing

The Baxter case did not legalize physician-assisted suicide. Suicide proponents, including Dr. Stephen Speckart, have conceded the lack of legality.[1]  Baxter is, however, confusing with even lawyers unable to agree on its meaning.[2] 

B.  The Confusion has Allowed Suicide Proponents to Claim that Assisted Suicide is Legal

This confusion has allowed suicide proponents to claim that assisted suicide is legal.  Indeed, they have convinced the Board of Medical Examiners to issue a statement implying that assisted suicide is legal.  This is "Position Statement No. 20," also called "Board Advisory No. 20." [3]

C.  Suicide Proponents are Recruiting Doctors; Doctors and the Public are at Risk

Suicide proponents have been actively recruiting doctors to perform assisted suicides with the false assurance that it is legally safe to do so.[4]  A doctor so recruited could find himself sued or even convicted of a homicide.  On the other hand, the present confusion could frustrate a civil and/or criminal action by an aggrieved party, such as a son and daughter outraged that the doctor has caused their father's suicide.

With the present situation, it’s hard to know legally what will happen.  Meanwhile, there is no assurance that any such suicide will be voluntary and/or not the product of abuse or coercion, for example, in the inheritance situation.  There is no assurance that the victim will not be a person with many quality years left to live, if only he or she had not been steered to suicide.

D.  The Solution
 
If instead, the law is clarified that physician-assisted suicide is not legal, there will be a clear tool for law enforcement, the medical profession and other interested parties to protect citizens from the negative consequences of assisted suicide legalization  (pressure, steerage, people throwing their lives away,  etc.).

HB 505 does this by clarifying Montana’s existing prohibition against “aiding or soliciting suicide” in 45-5-105.  The bill states:

 "A person who purposely aids or solicits another person to commit suicide, but such suicide does not occur, including physician-assisted suicide, commits the offense of aiding or soliciting suicide."[5]

E.  Tell Your Senator to Vote "Yes" on HB 505

This is why HB 505 is needed now, to stop the confusion to protect both doctors and the public.  Tell your Senators to vote "Yes" on HB 505!

Footnotes

[1]  In 2009, Dr. Speckart testified in support of SB 167, which had sought to legalize assisted suicide in Montana.  He said:  "[M]ost physicians feel significant dis-ease with the limited safeguards and possible risk of criminal prosecution after the Baxter decision."  See transcript at  http://maasdocuments.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/speckart-transcript.pdf
Senator Anders Blewett made a similar concession, stating:  “[U]nder current law, ... there’s nothing to protect the doctor from prosecution.”   See transcript at http://maasdocuments.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/blewett_speckhart_trans_001.pdf
[2]  See e.g. The Montana Lawyer, November 2011, Cover Story:  "The aid-in-dying debate: Can a physician legally help a patient to die in Montana?  Court ruling still leaves the issue open to argument, (with pro-con articles by Senator Anders Blewett and Senator Jim Shockley with Margaret Dore, available at  http://maasdocuments.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/mt-lawyer-cover-story_001.pdf
[3]  The current version of "Position Statement No. 20" is available at http://bsd.dli.mt.gov/license/bsd_boards/med_board/pdf/physician_aid_in_dying.pdf  
[4]  See letter from Stephen Speckart and George Risi, to all active Montana doctors, dated March 5, 2012 (falsely stating that “no basis exists [under Baxter] to prosecute a physician for providing aid in dying [physician-assisted suicide]”).  Available at http://maasdocuments.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/risispeckart_ltr_001.pdf  This letter attaches the original version of "Position Statement No. 20"  
[5]  HB 505 can be viewed here:  http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/2013/billpdf/HB0505.pdf 

Why Do So Many Disability Groups Oppose Physician Assisted Suicide?

by:  James D. McGaughey, Executive Director,

Connecticut Office of Protection and Advocacy for Persons with Disabilities. 

(Adapted from an article that originally appeared in the

International Social Role Valorization Journal in 2010.)

http://www.ct.gov/opapd/cwp/view.asp?Q=519546&A=3683 

In 2009, a proposal that would have legalized Physician Assisted Suicide was introduced in the Connecticut General Assembly.  The language of that proposal paralleled legislation being pursued in other states by Compassion and Choices, a successor organization to the Hemlock Society.  When the proposal was withdrawn without a public hearing, Compassion and Choices moved to the Courts, seeking a judicial ruling that provisions of the Connecticut Statutes prohibiting assisting a person to commit suicide should not be applied to physicians who write lethal prescriptions for their patients.  Their lawsuit was dismissed.  Now, in 2013, it appears that another attempt to legalize Physician Assisted Suicide is being made in Connecticut.  While the details of the current proposals are unavailable as of this writing, they will likely be similar to proposals that are being pursued in other states – proposals that have drawn stiff opposition from disability advocates in those states.
 

Proponents of legalizing Physician Assisted Suicide argue that it’s all about compassion and personal autonomy.  Citing examples of individuals who have ended, or who apparently want to end their lives by taking lethal doses of prescribed drugs, they propose adoption of the euphemistic term “assistance with dying”, and suggest Physician Assisted Suicide be seen as a compassionate alternative to suffering intractable pain or endless, intrusive, de-dignifying medical interventions.  If all we hear is their side of the story it seems reasonable enough.  After all, shouldn’t we have the option of avoiding an ignoble end?  Shouldn’t our doctors be able to prescribe drugs that will do the job quietly and professionally?  Isn’t this a matter of personal choice? What’s wrong with just having the option?  

Leading disability rights groups see plenty of problems with it. A number of well respected organizations, including the National Council on Disability, the American Association of People with Disabilities (AAPD), the National Council on Independent Living (NCIL), the National Spinal Cord Injury Association, the World Institute on Disability, Justice For All, TASH (formerly called The Association of the Severely Handicapped), the Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund (DREDF), and grass roots groups such as ADAPT and Not Dead Yet have all adopted positions opposing legalization of assisted suicide.  In fact, members of many of these groups have been teaming up with local independent living centers and state-level advocacy coalitions to challenge the state-by state campaign to promote Physician Assisted Suicide.