Dear Legislators:
I am attorney in Washington State where assisted suicide is legal. I am writing to urge you to not make our mistake. Please vote "No" on [the third reprint of A2270].
I have prepared an in-depth legal/policy analysis describing some of the problems with A2270, which can be viewed at the links set forth below. (or click here).
I make three points:
1. The bill, A2270, is titled "Aid in Dying for the Terminally Ill Act." "Aid in Dying" is a euphemism for assisted suicide and euthanasia. The title is, regardless, deceptive because it implies that A2270 is limited to people who are dying, which is untrue. For example, A2270, if enacted, will apply to people with chronic conditions who otherwise have years, even decades, to live. See memo, pp. 4-7. Once enacted, there will be pressure to expand to a broader group of people. See memo, pp. 7-8.
2. The bill is a recipe for abuse with the most obvious reason being a complete lack of oversight when the lethal dose is administered. See memo, pp. 9-16.
3. The bill lacks transparency and accountability. See memo., pp. 17-19.
The last part of the memo is a discussion of the "Oregon and Washington Experience," with supporting documentation attached.
Here is a link to the memo and attachments in one document: https://choiceisanillusion.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/nj-no-on-a2270-no-assisted-suicide-11-12-14.pdf
Or, if you like, a link to the memo alone: https://choiceisanillusion.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/nj-no-on-a2270-memo-only-11-12-14.pdf and a link to the attachments:
https://choiceisanillusion.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/nj-no-on-a2270-attachments-pnly-11-12-14.pdf
Please contact me with any questions or concerns.
Thank you.
Margaret Dore, Esq., MBA, President
Law Offices of Margaret K. Dore, P.S.
Choice is an Illusion, a 501(c)(4) nonprofit corporation
www.choiceillusion.org
www.margaretdore.com
1001 4th Avenue, 44th Floor
Seattle, WA 98154
206 389 1754 main reception
206 389 1562 direct line
Thursday, November 13, 2014
Monday, August 25, 2014
Assisted suicide proposal ignores wrong diagnoses of terminal illness
http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/2014/08/letter_a_mistaken_prognosis_saps_the_will_to_live.html
Virtually every state’s chapter of the American Medical Association is opposed to assisted suicide, the reasons for which were absent from The Times’ recent editorial, “Death with dignity for the terminally ill includes crucial safeguards” (Aug. 10).
Studies show that diagnoses of terminal illness are very often wrong. A doctor may know someone has an illness, but determining how quickly it might kill the patient or even if it will kill him or her is difficult to determine. A wrong prognosis can easily lead patients into a spiral of hopelessness and to give up on treatment unnecessarily, thereby prematurely ending their lives.
In an age when almost every one of us knows someone who outlived their terminal prognosis, it’s important to remember that legalizing assisted suicide offers no second chances. No supposed “safeguard” can protect patients from deciding to die based on a faulty prognosis.
-- Eileen Fisher,
Bridgewater
Virtually every state’s chapter of the American Medical Association is opposed to assisted suicide, the reasons for which were absent from The Times’ recent editorial, “Death with dignity for the terminally ill includes crucial safeguards” (Aug. 10).
Studies show that diagnoses of terminal illness are very often wrong. A doctor may know someone has an illness, but determining how quickly it might kill the patient or even if it will kill him or her is difficult to determine. A wrong prognosis can easily lead patients into a spiral of hopelessness and to give up on treatment unnecessarily, thereby prematurely ending their lives.
In an age when almost every one of us knows someone who outlived their terminal prognosis, it’s important to remember that legalizing assisted suicide offers no second chances. No supposed “safeguard” can protect patients from deciding to die based on a faulty prognosis.
-- Eileen Fisher,
Bridgewater
Labels:
Assisted Suicide
People with Disabilities at Risk from Assisted Suicide
http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/2014/08/letter_people_with_disabilities_at_risk_from_assisted_suicide_measures.html
In its editorial "Death with dignity for the terminally ill proposal includes critical safeguards" (Aug. 10),The Times' assurances that the Death with Dignity for the Terminally Ill Act (A2270) has safeguards is not very reassuring to those of us with disabilities, who see it as dangerous to our lives.
Citing the Oregon and Washington laws as further assurance simply repeats propaganda from proponents. The Oregon law has no protection against coercion used against vulnerable people by those whose motives involve fraud or abuse. Oregon annually destroys data in the doctors’ reports about the deaths allowed by the law, leaving only statistics without investigation, so it is really overreaching to say the law has meaningful protections.
The current legislation in the Statehouse has “protections” that amount to an honor system, providing little comfort to people with severe disabilities. Indeed, whatever protections were seen by The Times are at best a half-hearted attempt by proponents to placate broad-based concerns over this legislation, the assurances of The Times’ editorial board notwithstanding. Unfortunately, these provisions may protect those who assist suicide from any liability for mistakes or abuses, but they do nothing to protect the patient or more vulnerable people with disabilities.
-- Norman A. Smith,
Robbinsville
The writer is president of the board of directors of the Hamilton-based Progressive Center for Independent Living and associate executive director of Project Freedom, based in Robbinsville.
In its editorial "Death with dignity for the terminally ill proposal includes critical safeguards" (Aug. 10),The Times' assurances that the Death with Dignity for the Terminally Ill Act (A2270) has safeguards is not very reassuring to those of us with disabilities, who see it as dangerous to our lives.
Citing the Oregon and Washington laws as further assurance simply repeats propaganda from proponents. The Oregon law has no protection against coercion used against vulnerable people by those whose motives involve fraud or abuse. Oregon annually destroys data in the doctors’ reports about the deaths allowed by the law, leaving only statistics without investigation, so it is really overreaching to say the law has meaningful protections.
The current legislation in the Statehouse has “protections” that amount to an honor system, providing little comfort to people with severe disabilities. Indeed, whatever protections were seen by The Times are at best a half-hearted attempt by proponents to placate broad-based concerns over this legislation, the assurances of The Times’ editorial board notwithstanding. Unfortunately, these provisions may protect those who assist suicide from any liability for mistakes or abuses, but they do nothing to protect the patient or more vulnerable people with disabilities.
-- Norman A. Smith,
Robbinsville
The writer is president of the board of directors of the Hamilton-based Progressive Center for Independent Living and associate executive director of Project Freedom, based in Robbinsville.
Labels:
Assisted Suicide,
disability
Wednesday, June 18, 2014
Legal/Policy Analysis Against Bill A2270
By Margaret Dore, Esq., MBA
A legal/policy analysis against New Jersey's proposed assisted suicide/euthanasia bill, A2270, can be viewed by clicking here.
If the analysis is "too big" for your computer, you can view it in pieces, by clicking the following links to: the cover sheet and index;the memo; and the appendices.
There are three main points:
1. A2270 is titled "Aid in Dying for the Terminally Ill Act." "Aid in Dying" is a euphemism for assisted suicide and euthanasia. The title is, regardless, deceptive because it implies that A2270 is limited to people who are dying, which is untrue. A2270 applies to people who may have years, even decades, to live. See memo, pp. 5-8.
2. The bill is a recipe for elder abuse with the most obvious reason being a complete lack of oversight when the lethal dose is administered to the patient. Even if he struggled, who would know? See memo, pp. 8-17.
3. The bill lacks transparency and accountability. Id., pp. 17-19.
The last part of the memo is a discussion of the "Oregon and Washington Experience," with supporting documentation attached.
Please contact me with any questions or concerns at contact@choiceillusion.org or margaretdore@margaretdore.com.
Margaret Dore, President
Choice is an Illusion, a human rights organization
Law Offices of Margaret K. Dore, P.S.
www.choiceillusion.org
www.margaretdore.com
1001 4th Avenue, 44th Floor
Seattle, WA 98154
Labels:
Assisted Suicide,
Elder Abuse,
euthanasia,
Margaret Dore,
Oregon,
Washington
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)