Showing posts with label Slippery Slope. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Slippery Slope. Show all posts

Friday, June 7, 2024

Beyond Terminal Illness. The Widening Scope of Physician-Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia in the US.

Please find Dr. Komrad's explanatory note to colleagues below.

Physician-assisted suicide (PAS)—commonly but misleadingly called “medical aid in dying”1—is now legal in 11 jurisdictions in the US. PAS remains an area of great controversy among physicians, medical ethicists, and various patient advocacy groups, as evidenced by numerous opinion pieces in Psychiatric Times.2,3 While we recognize that individuals of good conscience may differ on the ethics of PAS, we have consistently maintained—as the American Medical Association has opined—that4:

Physician-assisted suicide is fundamentally incompatible with the physician’s role as healer, would be difficult or impossible to control, and would pose serious societal risks.

Tuesday, January 16, 2018

Iowa: "Slippery Slope" Is Real

The question of suicide facilitated by medical professionals, physician assisted suicide (PAS), has garnered a great deal of interest on this editorial page. While many of us have poignant stories to tell, anecdotes do not suffice when debating such crucial matters for society.

In the past, Editorial Page Editor Mr. Jon Alexander has rightly advocated for the importance of research in public policy. However, he seems to have set aside his own advice in this case. A careful look at the data from around the world would have revealed that, far from being a “red herring,” the “slippery slope” argument is based not on irrational fear, but on solid information.

Thursday, November 13, 2014

If New Jersey's Assisted Suicide Bill Is Enacted, There Will be Pressure to Expand its Reach to Broader Groups of People.

By Margaret Dore, Esq., MBA

Today, the New Jersey Assembly passed a proposed assisted suicide/euthanasia bill, which goes next to the New Jersey Senate. The bill is the "third reprint" of A2270, which has a six months to live eligibility criteria for assisted suicide and euthanasia.

If enacted, there will be pressure to expand “eligibility” to broader groups of people who are not close to death.  I say this due to what’s been happening with hospice and our experience here in Washington State regarding our similar law.  See also this legal/policy analysis of the third reprint.

Hospice

Hospice has a six months to live eligibility criteria.  In August, the Washington Post reported that there “appears to be a surge in hospices enrolling patients who aren’t close to death.”[1]  This practice is resulting in the overdose deaths of non-dying people.[2]

This is consistent with what I've been hearing from people in both the US and Canada regarding the deaths of their family members.[3]

Washington State

In Washington State, our law went into effect in 2009.  Since then, we have had informal “trial balloon” proposals to expand our law to non-terminal people.  For example, there was a column in the Seattle Times, which is our largest paper, containing this suggestion for euthanasia of people who didn't save enough for their old age. The column stated:
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.[4] 
So, you work hard all your life, pay taxes and then your pension plan goes broke, this is how society would pay you back, with non-voluntary or involuntary euthanasia?

Prior to passing our law, I never heard anyone talk like this.

Don't make Washington's mistake.

Margaret Dore is an attorney in Washington State and President of Choice is an Illusion.  For more information about problems with New Jersey's bill, please see Ms. Dore' legal/policy memo regarding that law, which can be viewed here: https://choiceisanillusion.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/nj-no-on-a2270-no-assisted-suicide-11-12-14.pdf

[1] Peter Whoriskey, “As More Hospices Enroll Patients Who Aren’t Dying, Questions About Lethal Doses Arise,” Washington Post. August 21, 2014, http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/storyline/wp/2014/08/21/as-more-hospices-enroll-patients-who-arent-dying-questions-about-lethal-doses-arise/?
[2] Id.
[3] See e.g. Carol Mungas, "I support House Bill 505, which clearly states that assisted suicide is not legal" (My husband, Dr. James E. Mungas "was effectively euthanized against his will"),  http://www.montanansagainstassistedsuicide.org/2013/03/i-support-house-bill-505-which-clearly.html; Daniela, "Euthanasia without patient consent and over the family's objection," ("Our family . . . is having emotional problems because of what we witnessed.... [N]ow I hear my grandma cry for water every night") http://www.margaretdore.org/2014/11/euthanasia-without-patient-consent-and.html and Kate Kelly, "Mild stroke led to mother's forced starvation,"("I cried much of the time, but softly, so she would not know.  I didn't want to add to her agony.")   http://www.choiceillusion.org/p/mild-stroke-led-to-mothers-forced.html
[4] To view a copy of the newspaper column, please go here: https://choiceisanillusion.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/jerry-large_001.pdf.