To read a pdf version, click here.
I. INTRODUCTION
The proposed Connecticut Act, Raised Bill No. 88, seeks to legalize physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia as those terms are traditionally defined.[2] This will be on both a voluntary and involuntary basis.
The Act is based on similar acts in Oregon and Washington State. I urge you to protect yourselves and the people you care about. Vote “No” to reject Raised Bill No. 88.
Alex Schadenberg, Executive Directive, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition
In January 2020 the assisted suicide lobby appealed a Massachusetts Superior court decision which found that there was no right to assisted suicide in Massachusetts.
Recently the Massachusetts Supreme Court agreed to hear the case and yesterday, EPC-USA submitted a brief in the Massachusetts Supreme Court in this case.
The case known as Kligler concerns Dr Roger Kligler, who is living with prostate cancer and seeking death by assisted suicide and Dr Alan Schoenberg, who is willing to prescribe lethal drugs for Kligler to die by assisted suicide. Kligler who claimed to be terminally ill when launching the case in 2016 remains alive today.
Kligler and Schoenberg are arguing that doctors cannot be prosecuted for prescribing lethal drugs for assisted suicide to a competent terminally ill person under the Massachusetts state constitution.
 |
| Jeanette Hall and her son, Scott, in November 2000 |
I. INTRODUCTION
Aid in dying has been a euphemism for physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia since at least 1992.[1] The proposed Act is based on similar acts in Oregon and Washington State. Oregon’s Death with Dignity Act went into effect in 1997. Washington’s nearly identical act went into effect in 2009.
All three acts apply to persons with a six month or less life expectancy. Such persons may in fact have years or decades to live. A well known example is Jeanette Hall. In 2000, she made a settled decision to use Oregon’s act. Her doctor convinced her to be treated for cancer instead, such that she is alive today, twenty-two years later.
To view original article, click here
 |
| Judge Lynn |
By Jim Parker
Chief U.S. District Judge Barbara M.G. Lynn has sentenced Novus Health Services Medical Directors Mark E. Gibbs, M.D., and Laila Hirjee, M.D., along with one of the company’s nurses, Tammie Little, to a combined 23 years in prison following their convictions for hospice fraud exceeding $40 million.
Gibbs was sentenced to 13 years as well as paying restitution of nearly $28 million. Hirjee received 10 years in prison and must pay more than $16 million. The judge also sentenced Little to a 33 month incarceration.
The company’s CEO Bradley Harris was also convicted in the case. He agreed to a plea deal, pled guilty and testified against his former employees, according to the U.S. Department of Justice.
By Margaret Dore, Esq.
On February 10, 2021, assisted suicide/euthanasia proponents introduced a bill seeking to amend California's End of Life Option Act. The bill, SB 380, eliminates the Act's 2026 sunset date, and also allows a 15 day waiting period to be shortened to 48 hours in certain circumstances.[1]
Katy Grimes, editor of the California Globe (pictured), had this to say:
When it comes to carrying out the death penalty for convicted murders, the California Legislature finds the lethal drug cocktails "cruel and unusual punishment," which they say is a violation of the Eighth Amendment. Yet lawmakers were more than willing to approve a lethal drug cocktail to allow sick people to kill themselves. I wrote [this] in 2015 as the California Legislature was considering [passage of the Act].[2]
By Michael Cook
For entire article, click here.
The Colombian legislature has once again failed to pass a law legalizing euthanasia. Earlier this week a bill proposed by representative Juan Fernando Reyes Kuri needed to reach 85 votes in favour, but fell two votes short.
Although Colombia is often described as a country where euthanasia is legal, the actual situation is complicated. In 1997 the country’s Constitutional Court ruled that that “the State cannot oppose the decision of an individual who does not wish to continue living and who requests help to die when suffering from a terminal illness that causes unbearable pain, incompatible with his idea of dignity”. It directed the legislature to pass a law regulating the right to die.
However, more than 20 years have passed and one bill after another has failed.
By Margaret Dore, Esq.
By Barbara Lyons (pictured here)
Thanks to the dedicated, persistent work of a diverse coalition of people in the disability rights, medical, right-to-life and faith communities, the Senate adjourned last night without taking up the bill. It is dead for this session.
The law on assisted dying [euthanasia] in Jersey is being reviewed by a Citizen's Jury, and it is expected to start a conversation which could lead to a debate on the law in Jersey's States Assembly.
The panel is made up of 23 members who will hear evidence on both sides of the assisted dying debate before reaching a conclusion by the end of May 2021.
To view original article, click here.
The Social Affairs Commission had debated and voted for the bill, but it has now been blocked by 3,000 amendments.
A proposal to legalise assisted dying for people with incurable diseases has been blocked in the French parliament, largely by five opposition party MPs.
The MPs from the opposition party Les Républicains submitted 2,158 amendments to the bill, of a total of 3,000. This means the proposal is very unlikely to be adopted as planned on Thursday April 8.
At the beginning of February, the public initiative portal Manabalss.lv collected the necessary 10,000 signatures on an initiative to legalize euthanasia in Latvia.
Previously, the citizens' initiative on euthanasia legalization was rejected by the Saeima Mandate, Ethics and Submissions Commission.
by Filipe Avillez. For original article click here
Portugal’s euthanasia bill has been declared unconstitutional by the country’s top court.
Parliament initially approved five proposed laws on euthanasia in February 2020, these were then streamlined into a single bill which was approved by the house and sent to the President, who had the option of signing it outright, vetoing it or sending it to the constitutional court. He chose the latter, asking the judges to look specifically at issues with the terminology.
Pro-euthanasia parties – mostly left-wing, with the notable exception of the Communist Party, which has come out firmly against euthanasia – ignored the opinions of every expert organization in approving the law, including the doctors’, nurses’ and lawyers’ guilds and the ethics committee.
A number of the points made by you are incisive and helpful. I found your interpretation of section 27 of the Constitution particularly useful.... The argument will, amongst others, find its way into the final legal argument before the High Court, and the courts that follow.
To view Dore's original memorandum, click here. To view the memorandum's three-part appendix, click part 1, part 2 and part 3.
 |
| Dore with Elaine Kolb |
"Don't render yourselves, and the people you care about, sitting ducks to heirs and other predators."
By Margaret Dore, Esq.
To read Dore's analysis opposing Raised Bill No. 6425, with supporting documentation, click here and here.
1. The Bill
