The Next Death-With-Dignity Battleground
By PAULA SPANMost fall weekends, you can find Randee Laikind buttonholing people at the Shelburne Falls Market in western Massachusetts, or wielding her clipboard on the town common in nearby Greenfield or Amherst.“I try to be very polite,” she told me. “I say, ‘Would you consider signing this petition to put the Death With Dignity Act on the ballot, so Massachusetts citizens can vote on it?’”
Ms. Laikind, who’s 63 and no stranger to activism, has been a bit surprised by the response, or lack thereof. “I’ve never had anyone say no,” she said. “They don’t even ask me questions; they just say, ‘Where do I sign?’”
One Greenfield woman started crying. “She said, ‘If only this had been around last year when my father was dying.’” She added her signature, Ms. Laikind said. So did Ms. Laikind’s former internist, whom she ran into in a restaurant.
Since mid-September, a small cadre of similar volunteers has gathered about 70,000 voters’ signatures, aiming to make Massachusetts the fourth state where terminally ill patients may legally seek physicians’ help to end their lives. The organizers, who call their campaign Dignity 2012, need only 70,000 to put the question on the state ballot in November 2012, but to be sure they have enough to pass scrutiny, they’re aiming for 100,000. The signatures must be submitted by the end of November.
The proposed statute, closely modeled on an initiative that Washington State voters passed in 2008, would allow a patient who’s expected to die within six months to self-administer lethal medication.
It includes a long list of precautions and protections: a lot of physician counseling and information; two doctors verifying that the patient is mentally competent and acting voluntarily; a 15-day waiting period between a first and second request, and another 48 hours before the prescription can be filled. At least one of the two witnesses to the written request can’t be a relative or an heir. And of course, the patient can always change his or her mind.
“Thousands and thousands of people have personal experience that leads them to support this,” said Steve Crawford, a spokesman for Dignity 2012. “They understand that as advanced as our medical technology is, we can’t relieve everyone’s suffering. Those end-of-life decisions belong to the individual.”
If it succeeds, the petition initiative would place the Massachusetts Death With Dignity Act before the State Legislature. But no legislature has ever passed such a law. It’s a safe bet that Massachusetts lawmakers will duck the subject, leading to a ballot question in November 2012, leading to a major emotional clash in this heavily Catholic state.
The Massachusetts Catholic Conference has already denounced the initiative in a statement saying, “The Roman Catholic Bishops of Massachusetts stand firm in the belief that a compassionate society should work to prevent suicide, which is always a terrible tragedy, no matter what form it may take.” Cardinal Sean P. O’Malley of the Boston Archdiocese called the act “a corruption of the medical profession” that violates the Hippocratic oath.
In the states where assisted suicide has won voter approval (Oregon in 1994 and again in 1997, and Washington in 2008) or has failed to win it (Michigan in 1998, Maine in 2000), advocates for people with disabilities, anti-abortion organizations, religious groups and others have battled it. But “the Catholic Church and its political arms provided the lion’s share of the campaign contributions to the opposition,” said Barbara Coombs Lee, president of Compassion and Choices, an end-of-life advocacy group. “These are big budgets.” In Washington State, Ms. Coombs Lee said, the campaign cost close to $7 million.
(Currently, supporters of legalizing assisted death for the terminally ill are mobilizing in Hawaii, where Compassion and Choices believes it is already legal under existing statutes, and in Vermont, where a bill has been introduced in the Legislature.)
We don’t know how things will play out in Massachusetts more than a year from now. But we do know, from Oregon’s long experience and Washington’s shorter one, what happens after all the furor, the ads, the charges and countercharges when a so-called death-with-dignity law actually takes effect.
What happens is less than one might expect.
In Oregon, 96 people obtained end-of-life prescriptions last year and 59 died after ingesting the medication, according to the state’s Department of Human Services. A great majority had enrolled in hospice programs and died at home. In Washington, in the first full year with the law in place, 87 people received prescriptions last year and 51, mostly cancer patients, used them to die. Again, most had enrolled in hospice and died at home.
Notice that more than a third of the patients who went to considerable trouble to avail themselves of lethal medications didn’t use them. They may have had a change of heart. They may have been persuaded by loved ones not to take their lives. Or perhaps the prescription represented a reassurance more than an exit plan.
That’s what Ms. Laikind thinks. Having helped found a hospice, she has spent a lot of time with people who are dying. “They lose so much dignity,” she said. “Decisions are made around them. I think they find it comforting to have the ability to take control, even if they decide not to use it.”
---------
Commentary: The article I have chosen to perform an analysis of today is titled "The Next Death-with-Dignity Battleground" and was published on October 26 of this year in the New York Times. In the article, journalist Paula Span addresses Dignity 2012, an issue that will be on the state ballot next November in Massachusetts. The measure is a petition of Massachusetts citizens seeking to legalized physician-assisted suicide in their state. Many of these citizens are seeking such a law from their own personal experience. As one interviewee put it, "If only this had been around last year when my father was dying!" The statute would apply to patients expected to die within six months. It also requires these seven things:
-Physicisan counseling
-Two doctors verifying the mental capacity of the patient
- 15-day waiting period between a first and second request for medication
-48 hours before the prescription can be filled
-At least one of the two witnesses to the request cannot be related or an heir to the person requesting meds
-The patient must be able to change his or her mind
As the state of Massachusetts is predominantly catholic, the state's Catholic Conference has firmly denounced the proposition stating that, "a compassionate society should work to prevent suicide, which is always a terrible tragedy, no matter what form it may take." Similar measures have been passed in Oregon and Washington, while such attempts have failed in the states of Michigan and Maine. The statistics from Oregon and Washington indicate that in the last year, of the 183 individuals who have received lethal prescriptions, only 110 died. Miss Randee Laikand, a leader in the movement, says that it is all about human dignity.
When I came across this article, I knew it pertained to the Hippocratic Oath because the second section in the oath explicitly addresses physician-assisted suicide. This article both mentions the Oath and contradicts it in the position it advocates.
Life is a gift. Because of this Biblical truth, we as Christians need to be concerned about protecting the value and dignity of this precious gift. While I am not catholic, I must agree with the Massachusetts Catholic Conference in their denunciation of the proposition. Suicide is tragic. The Bible explicitly says not to take life: that is God's to take! When someone gives you a gift, do you just get rid of it as fast as you can? No! Of course not! You value it, use it, and enjoy it! This is why human dignity exists. We do not have any right to life, per se, as God's creatures, but since it is a gift, we should not take it! This is why human dignity exists. When Christians read articles like the one in the NY Times, we should be both saddened and moved to action. God calls us to lead and to be a light in the world. As a result, we should look into a action that involves the following things:
1) We should be bathing this issue in prayer. Prayer is our most effective weapon against the wrong intentions of man, and it advances God's kingdom. Satan cannot stand where there is prayer.
2) For those who are already legally receiving dosages of this lethal medication in Oregon and Washington, and those illegally receiving them elsewhere, we must reach out! It should be our desire that none should perish. So if we know someone trying to take these, or have pastoral gifts, it is our responsibility to get involved and show these people the Gospel! The Gospel really changes everything in every way. Many people wanting to commit suicide see it as a way out of life, but in essence they are just throwing themselves right into the mouth of Hell. As Christians, we should desperately want to see these people embrace the Gospel!
3) We need to get involved in this issue, and make voters aware of what this legislation really means. Suicide affects more lives than one, and should not be taken lightly. People like the woman who began crying at her interview do not realize, or want to acknowledge, how deeply suicide affects the world. One person's life affects their next door neighbor, their family, their coworkers, their friends, their colleagues across the nation, and maybe even across the world. Suicide is not something to be taken lightly, and voters need to realize that. Giving them proper education on things like this can literally change the course of the world.
4) We need to elect godly leaders into office who would not allow legislation like this to pass, and we need to contact those who are in office. As Americans, not getting involved is not taking advantage of the freedoms that we have, and not exercising our God-given privileges and responsibilities as good citizens. Lobbying and campaigning is hard work, and it certainly doesn't get any easier in more liberal states, but it is still well-worth it. I have seen godly leaders be elected and godly legislation be passed in some very unlikely states before, where God's people have gotten out and worked hard. It's worth it, because it protects life!
5) We need to get godly doctors who will reach out to patients seeking lethal medication, rather than having doctors who will assist them. Such doctors should be willing to preach the Gospel, and counsel their patients accordingly, by not giving them the meds. In states like Oregon and Washington, that is a very hard thing to do, but a doctor who would stick with his Christian moral foundation in such a way should be highly revered. Doctors are supposed to be healers, not murderers. I know that is a strong word, but it is the truth.
In conclusion, human life is extremely valuable and precious, and any sort of suicide is atrocious, and we should seek at all costs to protect life. It is the most precious gift we have aside from our salvation, which in essence, is life itself. Let's get out there and be involved!
thanks MP!
ReplyDeleteinnova