09.26.07: New Study: No Harm to Disabled, Poor from Oregon’s Aid-in-Dying Law
A new study in the Journal of Medical Ethics found physician aid in dying does not lead to a “slippery slope” of more vulnerable populations participating in the law. The neutral experts' study debunks false claims by opponents of terminal patient choice.
The study drew from the experiences in Oregon and the Netherlands, where the practice is legal. It was conducted by a neutral group of experts who scrupulously and objectively looked at available data. The five experts, whose personal views varied on physician aid in dying, all found the law made no disproportionate impact on disabled people and other at-risk groups.
Researchers examined those populations considered “vulnerable” – including the elderly, women, uninsured, poor, people with AIDS, those with low educational status, racial and ethnic minorities and those with nonterminal physical disabilities or chronic non-terminal illness.
The results are significant because opponents of aid in dying often express concern about potential for abuse, and that legalized aid in dying would unfairly target more susceptible populations.
“For 10 years, opponents desperate to discredit a compassionate, rational approach to end of life choices have claimed that terminal patients will be coerced or pressured into hastening their deaths,” said Dr. Bob Brody, clinical professor of medicine, family and community medicine at the University of California at San Francisco and a leader of Californians for Compassionate Choices. “This latest study is another in a long line of independent investigations that show that Oregon’s aid in dying law is working as intended, and that opponents’ claims are not based on fact.”
09.26.07: Language Crucial in Discussing End-of-Life Issues
The language we use to discuss aid in dying can greatly affect people’s perceptions, according to an article in the Journal of Legal Medicine.
Author Kathryn Tucker, Compassion & Choices Legal Affairs Director, writes that the concepts are often “framed” by the language used to describe them. The phrase “assisted suicide” is a value-laden term that sparks negative connotations. A “suicidal” person indicates someone who wants to die and who may be mentally ill. The term is inflammatory and often used by opponents to aid in dying, she said.
But someone who wants aid in dying, Tucker asserts, is screened for mental competence and is already dying of a terminal illness. Using Oregon’s Death With Dignity Act indicates a patient will die in a peaceful, dignified manner under the guidance of a professional physician.
Tucker points out that these distinctions have led a growing number of leading medical and health policy groups, including the Oregon Department of Human Services, the American Public Health Association, the American Academy of Hospice Palliative Medicine and the American Medical Women's Association, to reject the term “suicide” to describe assisted dying. These groups use the term “aid in dying,” or “physician-assisted death."
09.25.07: Did Pope John Paul II Benefit from Aid in Dying?
A rousing article written by an Italian doctor suggests that Pope John Paul II may have directed his own death, implying an outright defiance of Catholic doctrine. Written by Italian intensive care specialist Dr. Lina Pavanelli, the article appeared in the latest edition of a highbrow Italian bimonthly and is summarized in Time Magazine. It comes just as the Vatican reiterated its stance on euthanasia, stating in a Sept. 14 directive that feeding tubes should never be removed, even for patients in a vegetative state.
Drawing on her medical expertise and her own observations of the ill religious leader, Pavanelli determined that the failure to insert a feeding tube until just days before his death hastened the Pope’s demise. She also asserts that he himself refused a feeding tube.
The pope’s longtime doctor said he tried to extend the pontiff’s life as long as possible. He did not specifically address Pavanelli’s claim that a feeding tube should have been inserted weeks, rather than days, before John Paul died.
09.21.07: American Medical Women’s Association Adopts Policy Supporting Aid-in-Dying
The American Medical Women’s Association acknowledged on its Web site today that it officially supports physician aid in dying, stepping forward as a leader among national medical organizations in the arena of end-of-life choice. After careful review of a decade of experience in Oregon, AMWA concluded, as have many outside observers, that the availability of aid in dying has posed no harm to patients , vulnerable populations or physicians.
The group determined that terminally ill, mentally competent patients have the right to hasten what could otherwise be an undignified, prolonged or extremely painful death. Doctors who agree with the practice should have the right to provide such a patient with the means and/or knowledge to use medication to hasten death.
The organization also strongly supports the use of palliative and hospice care for patients who are terminally ill.
09.18.07: Compassion & Choices launches End-of-Life Consultation program in California
Today Compassion & Choices launched an expanded End-of-Life Consultation program in California. The program will help terminal patients to access hospice, pain treatment, information on aid in dying options and other excellent end-of-life care.
Volunteers, clergy members and terminal patients spoke in four major cities, pledging their support for the consultation program.
“People of different faiths all agree that life is sacred and worthy of respect and preservation as long as possible,” said Rev. Ignacio Castuera, minister of Trinity United Methodist Church in Pomona, Calif., who spoke at the Los Angeles event. “However, when death is imminent, it is entirely respectful to the sanctity of life to allow a person to decide for himself or herself when and how they can ease their pain and suffering in a dignified manner.”
Compassion & Choices launched the program after Assembly Bill 374 became paralyzed in the Legislature in June. Legislators abandoned their constituents and dying patients who pleaded with them for the legal choice of a peaceful death.
“Dying patients cannot wait for politicians to catch up to their needs,” said Compassion & Choices President Barbara Lee. “We will do our utmost to ensure that no one who comes to us will suffer in their dying, or choose a violent course, or die without loved ones present because they have no other choice. The End of Life Consultation service is a way to avoid tragedies that are 100 percent preventable. We proclaim that aid in dying is neither secret nor shameful.”
Compassion & Choices stood up where lawmakers fell down, offering people legal alternatives to the unsavory, ineffective choices they have.
“The murky legal landscape that keeps aid in dying covert and clandestine leaves caring families trapped between participating in a criminal activity and abandoning their loved ones, just as anti-abortion laws did 40 years ago,” said Rev. Howard Moody. Moody, who helped found the Clergy Consultation Service on Abortion 40 years ago, spoke at the conferences via telephone from New York City.
The Compassion & Choices End-of-Life Consultation promises to make every effort to ensure that no one who comes to us will suffer in their dying, choose a violent course, or die alone, without loved ones present because they have no other choice.
To access to End-of-Life Consultation program, please call 800.247.7421.
09.14.07: Vatican Pressures Hospitals to Ignore Advance Directives
The Vatican has shown us that it enforces church rule at all cost, no matter the circumstances. The church states in a brief document released Sept. 14 that there is a moral obligation to administer food and water to a patient in a vegetative state, even if doctors have declared he or she will never regain consciousness. The order for Catholic hospitals to ignore advance directives flies directly in the face of American law and medical practice.
The church maintains that life is a gift from God and a person’s human dignity continues throughout someone’s entire physical life, regardless the doctor's recommended treatment or the wishes of the individual patient.
Lovelle Svart has lived with lung cancer since 2002. This past June her doctor gave her the news that she could expect to survive only six months or less. The prognosis motivated her to finalize her end-of-life decisions and exercise her right as an Oregonian to access the Death with Dignity Act.
A Compassion & Choices client, Svart became an unsung hero of the battle to defend Oregon’s unique law from the Ashcroft directive when she became one of the first patient-plaintiffs in the case that would make it all the way to the Supreme Court.
As part of her desire to live each day to the fullest, Svart is sharing stories from her life and documenting her final days in a video diary series hosted by The Oregonian newspaper. In the first installment of “Living to the End,” she shares her relief in letting go. “I’ve been fighting my body for so long that it almost became – (sigh) – OK, maybe I can stop fighting everything and just enjoy what there is for the rest of my life,” says Svart.
07.17.07: Florida Woman Prepares for a Peaceful Death
Compassion & Choices member Marcelle Jones spoke frankly to the Lakeland, Fla. Ledger about her wish for a humane, dignified death. Jones, 82, suffers from a serious medical condition and plans to stop eating and drinking when it becomes terminal.
“It does not have to be a matter of taking chemicals or being injected. It can be easy and peaceful,” Jones said of her decision.
06.28.07: N.Y. Lawmakers Approve Advance Directive Education Bill
A bill that will require the New York Department of Health to conduct education and outreach to consumers and health care providers on the importance of completing an advance directive was passed by both houses of the New York Legislature this month.
The bill (A8827, S4992) points to the urgent need for patients to appoint a health care proxy to make medical decisions should they become incapacitated. It outlines the leadership role health care providers must take in discussing end-of-life care preferences and values with patients and in providing health care proxy forms.
Compassion & Choices of New York lobbied for the important bill that is expected to be signed Gov. Eliot Spitzer soon.
06.07.07: AB 374 Paralyzed by the California Assembly
One day before the June 8 deadline in the Assembly, lawmakers have declined to bring AB 374 to a vote. The legislation would have given terminally ill Californians the option to request life-ending medications from a physician to hasten an impending death.
Assembly members Patty Berg and Lloyd Levine and Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez co-authored the bill and championed the cause valiantly. Berg’s Chief of Staff Will Shuck told the Sacramento Bee, “The people are there, and the politicians aren’t.”
The bill is shelved for the year but could be taken up again in 2008.
06.06.07: USA Today op-ed urges comfort and choice for the dying
In a USA Today op-ed, Dr. Sidney Wanzer makes the powerful argument that the U.S. needs an Oregon-style law in every state.
Wanzer asserts that a physician’s proper role once curative therapies are exhausted is to provide comfort care and choices for dying patients, noting in some cases, “They cry out that physician-aid in dying is the only humane and compassionate thing left in the spectrum of treatment at the end of life.”
He also asserts that this choice is not suicide, but, “Rather, it is the patient asking for treatment to end suffering by the use of a fatal dose of medication.”
06.05.07: New York Times calls for “sane and humane laws”
A New York Times editorial published just days after Dr. Jack Kevorkian’s parole describes the actions that led him to prison as “cavalier, indeed reckless” and calls for safe, regulated aid-in-dying laws to ease the real suffering of terminally ill patients.
It points to safeguards included in Oregon’s Death with Dignity Act and in California’s AB 374 as the rational antidote to covert, unregulated aid in dying that currently exists in states where no such laws exist.
05.30.07:Kevorkian's Release: Eight Years Later, What’s Changed?
It’s been eight years since Dr. Jack Kevorkian was sent to prison for second-degree murder for administering life-ending medication to Thomas Youk. Youk had ALS, or Lou Gehrig’s disease, and no safe, legal options for hastening his death. Instead, he was forced into a “back alley” out of fear of prolonged suffering.
This week, Kevorkian will be released on parole. What has changed for the terminally ill during the time he’s been behind bars? Shockingly, the answer is little or nothing.
THE CRISIS:
Covert, clandestine aid in dying occurs every day in the U.S. It is a symptom of a national health care crisis—the unbearable suffering and bleak options that many dying patients face at the end of life.
Instead of being forced into considering alternatives like Dr. Kevorkian, guns and other violent methods, patients should be able to talk with their physicians about a range of legal, safe, peaceful options for easing a painful dying process.
THE SOLUTION:
Oregon is the only state where terminally ill residents have lawful access to a full array of choices at the end of life. The Death with Dignity Act is a model for forward-thinking legislators who believe in dignity and mercy.
Assemblywoman Patty Berg, co-author of the California Compassionate Choices Act, said, "In a way, Dr. Kevorkian is the poster boy for why we need this law. The disturbing tale of Dr. Kevorkian is a tale of desperation and fear—a tale of the tragic lengths people will go to when they have no legal options. We don’t need crusaders who think they are above the law. We need a law."
Compassion & Choices works to decriminalize aid in dying and eliminate the covert, unregulated practices that currently exist. Laws such as Oregon’s Death with Dignity Act allow terminally ill patients to die at peace surrounded by loved ones: Not alone and desperate, not by violent means, and not under the hidden practice of providers like Dr. Kevorkian.
05.29.07:AP Poll Finds Strong Support for Aid in Dying
Results of an Associated Press-Ipsos poll released today show a majority of Americans support legal aid in dying for the terminally ill.
In telephone interviews, 1000 people were asked “Do you think it should be legal or illegal for doctors to help terminally ill patients end their own life by giving them a prescription for fatal drugs?” Forty-eight percent answered it should be legal, while 44 percent said it should be illegal.
Among people who do not regularly attend church services, support for legalization leaps to 70 percent. Thirty-four percent of churchgoers share their view. This finding underscores the fundamental right of all Americans to make important life decisions based on their own moral beliefs, without government restrictions based on particular faith beliefs.
Thirty-seven percent of the poll’s respondents identified themselves as conservatives and just 25 percent as liberals. Residents of the Northeast and the West showed the highest level of support at 59 percent and 52 percent respectively. Support was weakest in the South and Midwest.
05.18.07:Washington Ex-Governor Fights for Aid-in-Dying Law
Former Washington governor Booth Gardner has announced his intention to campaign for an aid-in-dying initiative for the state’s 2008 ballot.
The 70-year-old statesman, who was diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease in 1995, pledged to use whatever strength he has left to expand end-of-life choices for Washingtonians with an Oregon-style law. “I have a real tough time understanding why people like us, who’ve made tough decisions all their lives…do not have the right to make such a fundamental decision as this,” he said after accepting an award from business leaders.
A similar initiative was narrowly defeated by Washington voters in 1991. But voters can now look to Oregon, where nine years of experience with the Death with Dignity Act has proven that the practice has improved end-of-life care and did not lead to the “slippery slope” detractors feared.
Gardner plans to form a committee and begin gathering the signatures needed to get the initiative on the ballot.
04.23.07:LA Weekly Explores the Semantics of Aid in Dying
LA Weekly takes an in-depth look at the language used on both sides of the aid-in-dying debate in the article "The Semantics of Suicide Aid in Dying." The feature is built around the media, political and religious figures, and family stories surrounding the campaign for the California Compassionate Choices Act (AB 374).
It delves into Cardinal Roger Mahony's attack on AB 374 co-author and Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez, which charged him with supporting a "culture of death." Núñez upholds his resistance to religious pressure saying, "I was elected to represent the citizens of California, not the Catholic Church or the pope."
04.05.07:AAN Opposes Laws that Roll Back Advance Directives
The American Academy of Neurology (AAN) has announced its opposition to all state and federal legislation that would interfere with a patient’s right to make personal medical decisions through an advance directive or designated health care representative.
AAN, which represents more than 20,000 neurologists and neuroscience professionals, takes this position in response to the wave of legislation in the aftermath of the Terri Schiavo debacle that seeks to force life-prolonging interventions on incapacitated patients in spite of their stated wishes. Neurologists are often called upon to determine the cognitive capacity of a patient when a decision to maintain or remove such treatments is necessary.
Compassion & Choices shares AAN’s opposition and monitors such bills that would make it difficult if not impossible to withdraw artificial nutrition and hydration by setting restrictively high standards for consent and authorizing politicians and religious groups to challenge a family’s decision to remove a feeding tube in court.
We applaud and strongly support AAN’s position to respect a patient’s autonomy and health care wishes.
04.02.07:California AB 374 Supporters Stand Up for Religious Freedom
Patients’ rights advocates, families and clergy are in a “David and Goliath” struggle with Catholic clerics who are leading a well-funded pressure campaign to force Vatican dogma on all terminally ill Californians.
Catholic bishops and their political arm are at the forefront of opposition to AB 374. Cardinal Roger Mahony led the attack at the Los Angeles Cathedral today, charging those who support the bill with participating in a “culture of death.”
“People of different faiths and beliefs agree that life is sacred and should be respected and preserved as long as humanly possible,” said Reverend Dr. Ignacio Castuera, who spoke today at the Cathedral of Our Lady of the Angels in downtown Los Angeles. “However, when death is imminent, it is entirely respectful to the sanctity of life to allow a person to decide for himself or herself when and how they can ease their pain and suffering in a dignified manner.”
Nearly 70 percent of Californians from diverse faiths support a terminally ill patient’s right to request a prescription to ensure a peaceful death. AB 374 protects religious preferences by not requiring anyone to use it and by permitting any medical provider or hospital to not participate in a dying patient's choice to use it.Rather than promoting violent or covert practices relating to death, this law will bring the light of public scrutiny and improved care for dying patients across the board.
The bill’s co-author Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez, who is Catholic, met with Cardinal Mahony. Núñez respects the Cardinal’s view, but understands that this is another issue of individual choice where the overwhelming majority of Catholics have a different perspective than the official position of the church. “Personal liberty and dignity are important values to Californians, regardless of their religious beliefs,” Núñez said in a statement.
03.27.07:Assembly Judiciary Committee Votes in Favor of AB 374
The California Assembly Judiciary Committee approved to move the California Compassionate Choices Act (AB 374) out of committee today, 7–3.
The vote came after more than two hours of testimony from supporters and opposition groups, which began with a passionate statement from the bill’s co-author Assemblywoman Patty Berg. “AB 374 is about our fundamental right to privacy; a civil right that is expressed as a freedom to choose,” said Berg. “It is about freedom of the individual to make choices; and the freedom for your choices to be different than my choices.”
Many in the packed committee room were moved by testimony from 77-year-old terminally ill cancer patient Tom McDonald who faces the possibly of painfully coughing up blood in his final days. Fighting back tears, McDonald told lawmakers, “I don’t want to be one who will leave this life violently. But I will if I have to. I would much rather have the compassionate choices they have in Oregon, which would allow my wife to be with me at the end…to say goodbye with a kiss at a moment of our choosing, in a peaceful and dignified way.”
Groups in attendance to support the bill included Compassion & Choices of Northern California, the American Civil Liberties Union, the Older Women’s League of California and Clergy for Compassionate Choices.
Strong physician support for the measure was articulated by Dr. Jay Cohen of the California Association of Physician Groups (CAPG), which serves more than 15 million California patients. Cohen pointed to improved care and doctor-patient communication as the basis of CAPG’s backing, saying, “Our patients look to us for support and guidance. As has been shown in Oregon, which has a similar law, AB 374 will actually strengthen the bond between patients and their physicians and will improve all end-of-life options including hospice and proper pain management.”
Opponents’ fear tactics were countered by the real-life experiences of physicians and patients, and nine years of data from the Oregon law. Assemblyman Lloyd Levine closed the hearing with another call for choice in dying, imploring, “I simply ask that this committee, of this legislature for all Californians, allow each person to make the determination on their own, governed by their own moral authority and their own moral judgment.”
The bill moves next to the Assembly Appropriations Committee.
The Vermont House voted 82-63 to defeat H. 44, the Patient Control at the End of Life bill, late Wednesday. Legislators ignored the grassroots call and overwhelming support for decriminalization of aid in dying and gave in to the misinformation campaign of bill’s opponents.
Nine years of independently verified data from Oregon indisputably proves the Death with Dignity Act has not resulted in the dire consequences opponents predicted, yet those same scare tactics eroded support for the measure in Vermont. The “no” votes keep aid in dying covert, unregulated and unsafe in the state.
Compassion & Choices will not abandon terminally ill people in Vermont. Our Client Support teams will be available, even though the legislature failed to bring Vermonters the safety and assurance of legal aid in dying.
Compassion & Choices Action Network will continue to support grassroots efforts to enact aid-in-dying laws across the country. For updates on current legislative efforts, visit our Action Center.
03.20.07:Jury Awards Damages for Failure to Honor an Advance Directive
A Palm Beach County Florida jury awarded $150,000 in damages to the family of a 92-year-old Alzheimer’s patient who was kept alive by artificial means in violation of her advance directive wishes.
A nursing home ignored Madeline Neumann’s do-not-resuscitate order by calling 911 after she fell unconscious, which resulted in six days of hospital interventions before her death including the insertion of a breathing tube.
This verdict sends an important message to all elder care providers that a patient’s advance directive must be honored.
03.13.07:Mitt Romney Criticizes Government’s Response to Schiavo
Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney said in a television interview this week that matters such as the Terri Schiavo case are best left to the courts.
On the intervention by the Florida Legislature and Congress to reinsert Shiavo’s feeding tube despite a court order, Romney said, “I generally think that it’s not a good idea for courts to legislate. Nor is it a great idea for legislatures to adjudicate in a specific circumstance.”
Though most voters agree with Romney, he could face opposition from social conservatives on this issue.
03.12.07:Los Angeles Times Documents a Tale of Two Deaths
The Sunday, March 11 issue of the Los Angeles Times’ West magazine tells the story of “The End in Two Acts.” This feature-length article written by Lauren Kessler chronicles the quests of two terminally ill men for a peaceful death.
Juxtaposed are David Bradley, an Oregon man who finds the good death he seeks through the Death with Dignity Act, and California resident Tom McDonald, who pleads for better end-of-life choices. “Please give me a chance for a peaceful death, with my wife and children around me,” McDonald told the California Senate Judiciary Committee considering the Compassionate Choices Act last June. “Don’t condemn me to a death that is so insidious, with unbelievable pain and no relief.”
Bradley, who had esophageal cancer, self-administered medication through his feeding tube. Patients in Oregon ingest the medication in whatever manner they normally take nutrition and Bradley used a feeding tube after his throat became obstructed by a tumor.
McDonald, who suffers from melanoma that has spread to his shoulder and lungs, turned to Compassion & Choices for information on how to access aid in dying safely. For patients outside of Oregon, this requires surreptitious planning done with great care and professionalism. We provide information and consultation for every end-of-life choice and do not encourage any one choice above another.
Covert counseling is not optimal by any means, which is why Compassion & Choices works hard for Oregon-style law to be replicated in other states. This article has to potential to enlighten public opinion as the California Assembly considers the Compassionate Choices Act of 2007.
03.08.07:Oregon’s Ninth Year Numbers Document Improved End-of-Life Care
The Oregon Department of Human Services (ODHS) released its ninth annual report on the Death with Dignity Act today that confirms Oregonians benefit from improved end-of-life care under the statute.
A tiny number of Oregon’s dying patients accessed the law in 2006 – 65 out of approximately 31,000 – while an even smaller group of 46 hastened their deaths by self-administering medications. All but one of the terminally ill residents who chose the option had health coverage and all had access to hospice services. Oregon has the lowest rates of in-hospital deaths and the highest rates of home deaths in the nation.
In 2006, more than three-quarters (76%) of the patients who took the medications were enrolled in hospice. Executive Director of the Oregon Hospice Association (OHA) Ann Jackson summed up the results saying, “In its first nine years, the Oregon Death with Dignity Act has been responsibly implemented with none of the predicted dire consequences.” The OHA takes a neutral position on the law but supports the right to receive optimal hospice care, regardless of whether a patient is considering aid in dying.
The report is also notable this year for its use of value-neutral language to describe a patient’s choice for aid in dying. ODHS no longer uses the inflammatory term “assisted suicide,” instead referring to “persons who use the Oregon Death with Dignity Act.” The new language reflects the intent of the law which states, “Actions taken in accordance with (Oregon’s Death with Dignity Act) shall not, for any purpose, constitute suicide, assisted suicide, mercy killing or homicide, under the law."
The findings bolster supporters of the California Compassionate Choices Act of 2007, who held a news conference today to urge lawmakers to heed the results of the Oregon experience. Compassion & Choices President Barbara Coombs Lee told reporters, “Those who died using the law in the last nine years were able to fulfill their wishes for safe, peaceful deaths. The time has come for other states to follow Oregon and stop obstructing the dying wish of many mentally competent, terminally ill patients.”
Terminally ill cancer patient Glenn Elfman, a native Californian now living in rural Pistol River, Oregon, explained his decision to access the Death with Dignity Act saying, “I can’t tell you sitting here right now whether I will use this medication or not. But without any viable options for treatment, it’s a great comfort to have this option.”
03.05.07:The AAHPM Adopts Accurate, Unbiased Language
The American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine (AAHPM) has updated its position statement to include the term "Physician-Assisted Death." The AAHPM takes special note in recognizing the importance of using accurate, unbiased language:
The term Physician-Assisted Death is utilized in this document with the belief that it captures the essence of the process in a more accurately descriptive fashion than the more emotionally charged designation Physician-assisted Suicide. Subject to safeguards, Physician-Assisted Death has been legal and carefully studied in Oregon since 1997.
03.02.07:Vermont Aid-in-Dying Bill Clears First Hurdle
The Vermont House Human Services Committee voted 7–4 in favor of the Patient-Directed Dying Bill (H.44) yesterday after a week of hearings.
The bill, introduced in January and modeled after Oregon’s law, would allow a mentally competent, terminally ill patient with a six month or less prognosis to request a prescription to hasten his or her death if suffering becomes unbearable.
The people of Vermont have shown broad support for aid in dying, with poll numbers reaching as high as 78%. Similar legislation was introduced in Vermont in 2005 but stalled in the Human Services Committee with a 5–5 vote.
Members of Compassion & Choices of Vermont have rallied supporters to speak at hearings, appeal to lawmakers and voice their backing in the media.
The bill now moves to the House Judiciary Committee and next to the Senate.
Compassion & Choices President Barbara Coombs Lee’s essay examining spiritually and end-of-life decision making is featured in the March / April issue of Tikkun magazine.
The article uncovers an array of modern religious views surrounding death and traces their origins, while weighing the societal impact of medical interventions that can prolong the dying process. Coombs puts forth two ethical questions to consider when making end-of-life decisions that seek to support the natural rhythms of life and death.
California Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez joined Assembly members and seasoned aid-in-dying proponents Patty Berg and Lloyd Levine to introduce AB 374 at a press conference today in Sacramento. The Compassionate Choices Act of 2007 would bring peace of mind to dying Californians by allowing mentally competent, terminally ill adults to request a prescription for medication they, themselves, could take to end life if suffering became unbearable.
“This measure is an act of great respect and real compassion for the terminally ill,” Berg proclaimed before a crowd of media and supporters. “We are saying when you are dying, you are still very much an autonomous person. You still have rights, you still can make choices. And we believe that your choices and your privacy must be not only respected but be protected.”
The measure carries the same provisions as AB 651 that was defeated by just a single vote in the Senate Judiciary Committee in June of 2006. The powerful backing of Speaker Nunez, more than two dozen co-authors and the majority of Californians including seniors’ groups, doctors, clergy and civil liberties organizations raises expectations the bill will arrive on Gov. Schwarzenegger’s desk for a signature this session.
02.12.07:Geoffry Nunberg discusses "The Language of Death"
Geoffry Nunberg, linguist at UC Berkeley's School of Information, and author of Talking Right, discussing the appropriateness of using the word "suicide" when referring to aid-in-dying. He writes in the Los Angeles Times:
"But is 'suicide' really the appropriate label here? To most of us, the word suggests fanaticism, desperation or mental unbalance. Certainly most patients who want a doctor's help to end their lives wouldn't qualify as 'suicidal' by the ordinary definition of the term. And like other words ending in the suffix '-cide,' 'suicide' has overtones of criminality or wrongdoing — it's an act we speak of people 'committing,' like grand larceny or adultery. In fact, the Oxford English Dictionary expands its definition of 'suicide' as 'the act of taking one's own life' with the synonym 'self-murder.'"
02.08.07:Doctors' Beliefs Interfere with End-of-Life Care
Your doctor may not be telling you about end-of-life treatments he or she opposes on moral or religious grounds.
A study released this week in the New England Journal of Medicine found 8 percent of physicians feel they are not obligated to disclose legitimate treatment options they find personally objectionable and a shocking 18 percent say they do not have a duty to refer a patient to a physician who does not object to the procedure. An alarming 17 percent of respondents were specifically opposed to providing palliative sedation to dying patients.
Compassion & Choices believes physicians must offer patients a full range of options for comfort and control at the end of life. This survey underscores the urgent need for patients to have serious discussions with their health care provider before a crisis to ensure their wishes will be honored.
Pulitzer Prize-winning humorist Art Buchwald died peacefully at his son’s home in Washington, D.C. on January 17 at the age of 81 from kidney failure. Buchwald made headlines a year ago by making the conscious choice to die by refusing life-sustaining kidney dialysis treatments.
Expected to live only weeks after stopping dialysis, Buchwald surprised doctors, family and friends by moving out of a hospice in July of 2006. He went on to write funny and bittersweet columns about ending his life on his own terms, a period he simply described as, “The best time of my life.”
Compassion & Choices salutes Buchwald’s decision to refuse medical treatment, which is a private, legal decision that can be made by anyone facing a life-threatening illness.
To learn more about your right to stop life-sustaining treatments, call us at 800.247.7421 and ask to speak to a Client Support counselor.
The American Public Health Association (APHA) has announced a new policy that urges health care providers, health educators, journalists and policy makers not to use the terms “suicide” or “assisted suicide” to describe a mentally competent, terminally ill patient’s choice to self-administer medications to hasten death.
Adopted at the 2006 APHA Annual Meeting in November, the policy recommends using accurate and value-neutral terms such as “aid in dying” or “patient-directed dying” to describe this intensely personal choice.
The APHA announcement comes on the heels of the Oregon Department of Human Services’ move to stop using the term “physician-assisted suicide” on its Web site and in future reports on the state’s Death with Dignity Act.
Compassion & Choices applauds the APHA's policy, and urges others to use language that is accurate and honors the values of patients who seek aid in dying.
With a promise not to assist in any more deaths, Dr. Jack Kevorkian will be paroled in June of 2007.
Kevorkian has served more than eight years of a 10 to 25 year sentence for second-degree murder in the 1998 controlled substance poisoning of Michigan resident Thomas Youk, who had amyotrophic lateral sclerosis or Lou Gehrig’s disease.
Kevorkian drew the national and international spotlight to the issue of aid in dying. His notorious actions were successful in raising awareness of the real fear of suffering a prolonged and agonized death, and have highlighted major public policy problems. Compassion & Choices advocates that all mentally competent, terminally ill patients should have a full range of end-of-life choices, including aggressive pain and symptom management, palliative sedation, voluntarily stopping eating and drinking, forgoing life extending interventions and aid in dying.
Suffering from diabetes and active hepatitis C, the 78-year-old Kevorkian is not expected to live more than a year. Compassion & Choices believes he deserves the same chance for a peaceful, dignified death that is the right of all people.
Jean H. Gillett, a passionate supporter of the choice in dying movement, has died at her home in Palo Alto, Calif. at the age of 89.
Gillette was an active part of the movement for more than a quarter of a century. She was a charter member of the Hemlock Society and served in local chapters and on its national board.
Gillette was both a talker and a doer. She gathered hundreds of signatures during citizen initiative drives for aid-in-dying law in California and never missed a hearing on the issue at the state capitol in Sacramento. She volunteered for the Hemlock Society’s Caring Friends and was at the bedside of several cases over the years.
She was a long-time member of the Unitarian Universalist Church which affirmed her deeply-held beliefs as a humanist. Her activism and devotion to our issue will be deeply missed.
12.07.06:Rev. Ignacio Castuera Honored with 2006 Hugh Gallagher Award
Rev. Ignacio Castuera, Ph.D. has been named the 2006 recipient of the Hugh Gallagher Award which recognizes a person within the choice-in-dying movement who is a driving force in bringing people, especially those of diverse age, race, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation and persons with physical disabilities, to our issues and organization.
Castuera was a passionate, innovative and courageous supporter of the California Compassionate Choices Act. He tirelessly reached out to diverse groups to educate and advocate for exceptional end-of-life care that respects the beliefs and values of all individuals.
He was instrumental in achieving an increased level of acceptance and understanding of our efforts among clergy members, the media and policymakers, eloquently stating, “People of different faiths and beliefs agree that life is sacred and should be respected and preserved as long as humanly possible. However, when death is imminent, it is entirely respectful to the sanctity of life to allow a person to decide for himself or herself when and how they can ease their pain and suffering in a dignified manner.”
Castuera is the first national chaplain for Planned Parenthood Federation of America and serves at St. John’s United Methodist Church in the Watts neighborhood of Los Angeles. He has been a leader in the movement to create a positive religious response to the HIV/AIDS pandemic.
The award was created to commemorate the significant contributions of
Hugh Gallagher, who used his writing to educate the public about injustices; to promote understanding among diverse communities including the physically disabled, GLBT and other diverse populations; and to draw people into the choice-in-dying movement.
Castuera represents the best of what Compassion & Choices strives to be and we congratulate him on receiving this award.
11.15.06:What’s in a Name?
Last month, the Oregon Department of Human Services adopted value-neutral language for describing a mentally competent, terminally ill patient’s decision to access the state’s Death with Dignity Act. Their decision has sparked a lively debate over the power of language.
10.23.06:It Isn’t “Suicide” says Oregon Department of Human Services
Last week, media outlets reported on the Oregon Department of Human Services’ (DHS) decision to change its language for describing practice under the state’s Death with Dignity Act (DWDA). The term “physician-assisted death” was set to replace “physician-assisted suicide.” Upon further review, DHS has removed the term entirely and will now refer to “persons who use the Oregon Death with Dignity Act” on its web site and in future reports.
The new language reflects the intent of the law which states, “Actions taken in accordance with (Oregon’s Death with Dignity Act) shall not, for any purpose, constitute suicide, assisted suicide, mercy killing or homicide, under the law.”
Eliminating the emotionally-laden and inaccurate word “suicide” from state references to the DWDA is a major leap forward in clarifying the public’s perception of the distinction between suicide and a terminally ill patient’s choice for a peaceful and dignified death.
Compassion & Choices Legal Director Kathryn Tucker writes about Washington State, and why it is ripe for assisted dying legislation.
"It is timely for Washington to enact such legislation for several reasons. A fraction of dying patients, even with excellent pain and symptom management, confront a dying process so prolonged and marked by such extreme suffering and deterioration that it makes hastening impending death the least worst alternative. Eight years of experience in Oregon have demonstrated that risks to patients are not realized when a carefully drafted law is in place."
When the wishes of a patient or their medical decision-maker conflict with a physician’s best judgment, the New York Times asks the question, "Who should decide if CPR should be performed on a gravely ill patient?" Families face this difficult dilemma every day, yet medical guidelines and the rule of law are unclear as to who should have the final say.
Sandy Bush, a Compassion & Choices client and inspiring spokesperson, died peacefully at home in Colorado on Oct. 1, 2006. He was surrounded by his family and the mountain landscape he loved.
Sandy was diagnosed with high-grade prostate cancer in February of 2005. When doctor after doctor confirmed there was no hope for a cure, he began to detach from life due to fear of loss of control and suffering in his final days. He turned to Compassion & Choices for help. The Compassion & Choices Client Support team gave him the knowledge and confidence to form a plan to escape unbearable suffering.
In Sandy’s words, it gave him a second chance, “I simply needed to know that I could have some control over my own life. That was the start of my new life."
The retired engineer, pilot and professor regained his vigor and had much to give the world in his final months. Sandy became a passionate advocate of end-of-life choices, speaking to groups ranging from health care professionals to his fellow RV enthusiasts. He believed so deeply in our cause that he handed out Compassion & Choices membership brochures to friends and new acquaintances alike.
"Sandy's courage and tireless dedication to our cause in the face of dealing with a terminal illness, is the stuff that storybook heroes are made of," said Compassion & Choices Executive Director Marsha Temple. "He and his wife, Joann, were inspirations to everyone they met. I can't speak of Sandy without also speaking of Joann. They were soulmates, and he could not have done the work he did for Compassion & Choices without her constantly helping him every step of the way. I personally will miss Sandy and his never failing love of life very much."
Sandy reminded us that the dignity of choice is inherent in the will to live. We will forever be grateful for his spirit and ardent support.
09.05.06:Victory for Families in Nebraska
Nebraska’s proposed “humane care” ballot initiative failed to receive enough valid signatures to place it on the November ballot. The amendment would have required caregivers to administer food and water by any means necessary, unless the patient had explicit instructions to the contrary in an advance directive. It also opened the door for meddlesome politicians and organizations to challenge a family’s decision to remove a feeding tube, potentially tying it up in court for years.
Compassion & Choices has aggressively opposed health decision restriction efforts that have surfaced across the country in response to the Terri Schiavo case. This victory has strengthened our resolve to monitor and fight laws that seek to interfere with a patient’s wishes and a family’s ability to honor them.
08.30.06:Compassion & Choices calls for choice at the American Bar Association
Compassion & Choices President Barbara Coombs Lee and Director of Legal Affairs Kathryn Tucker participated in a panel discussion on Aug. 4 at the American Bar Association Annual Meeting in Honolulu, Hawaii. The session, titled "Gonzales vs. Oregon—Lessons for States, Terminally Ill, and Schiavo Patients," brought together leading voices in medicine, law, medical ethics, and patient advocacy to delve into the far-reaching impact of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to uphold Oregon’s Death with Dignity Act.
08.23.06:Nebraska Measure Reveals Religious Right's Extremism
A proposed ballot initiative to amend the Nebraska Constitution is likely to be sent to voters in November. If passed, it will take end-of-life care decisions out of the hands of patients and their families, and put them into the hands of strangers and the courts.
Dubbed the "humane care" amendment, the measure would require caregivers to administer food and water to patients, by any means necessary, unless an advance directive specifically states otherwise. It also allows public officials, politicians, advocacy groups, or any other interested party to intrude in a family's most intimate and difficult decision, tying it up in court for years.
In the wake of the Terri Schiavo case, state legislatures nationwide have entertained legislation similar to this amendment. Compassion & Choices has taken the lead nationally to oppose these health decision restriction efforts. These laws will do great harm to people who do not want to be kept alive and unconscious against their will. They will intensify the grief of families and expose private, intimate decisions to protracted court battles and self-serving political grandstanding.
We are committed to defeating the measure, making our resources and information available to any organized opposition effort that develops. By actively educating our Nebraska members, we will spread the word to cast a "No" vote on the amendment in November.
To support Compassion & Choice's efforts to educate the public about this potentially devastating law, make a donation now.
The exact text of the Nebraska Humane Care Amendment:
To Amend Article I of the Constitution of Nebraska by adding a new section 30:
Humane Care
Sec. 30. The fundamental human right to food and water should not be denied to any person, regardless of race, religion, ethnicity, nativity, disability, age, state of health, gender or other characteristic: No entity with a legal duty of care for a person within its custody (including a hospital, orphanage, foster home, nursing home, sanitarium, skilled nursing facility, prison, jail, detainment center, corporation, business, institution or individual) may refuse, deny, or fail to provide food and water sustenance and nourishment, however delivered, to any such person if death or grave physical harm could reasonably result from such withholding and the person at risk can metabolize. Any such person so threatened with dehydration or starvation, any relative of such person, such person’s legal guardian or surrogate, any public official with appropriate jurisdiction, or any protection and advocacy or ombudsman agency shall have legal standing to bring an action for injunctive relief, damages and reasonable attorney’s fees to uphold this standard of humane care. This section does not prohibit honoring the will of any person who, by means of a valid advance directive record, has fully, expressly, and personally either authorized the withholding of food or water from himself or herself under specific conditions, or delegated that decision, under specific conditions, to one or more relatives or to another person unrelated to the entity with a legal duty of care.
08.07.06:Aid in Dying Foe Brownback Launches New Threat
U.S. Senator Sam Brownback (R-Kansas) introduced a bill last week dubbed the “Assisted Suicide Prevention Act” that seeks to prohibit doctors from prescribing federally controlled substances for the purpose of aid in dying.
In a subsequent statement, Brownback theorized that, “When the law permits killing as a medical 'treatment,' society’s moral guidelines are blurred, and killing could gain acceptance as a solution for the chronically ill or vulnerable.”
Compassion & Choices Legal Director Kathryn Tucker faced Brownback in May of 2006 when she testified at a Judiciary Committee hearing he chaired on “assisted suicide and euthanasia.” Tucker countered the opposition’s unfounded claims against the Oregon Death with Dignity Act stating, “The available data demonstrate that making the option of assisted dying available, far from posing any hazard to patients or the practice of medicine, has galvanized improvements in end of life care, benefiting all terminally ill Oregonians.”
In response to this latest threat to Oregon’s law and patient’s rights across America, Compassion & Choices President Barbara Coombs Lee pledges to take on the challenge saying, “We have met these elected officials head-on and will continue to do whatever it takes to deny their ability to use the levers of power to impose their ideological view of a person’s right to choice in dying. We must all be vigilant against this small group of senators who are determined to control our dying moments.”
08.03.06:Char Andrews, a true inspiration to the end-of-life choice movement, passed away at her home Wednesday, in Salem Oregon
One of our most vigorous and delightful spokespersons, Char Andrews, died at her home Wednesday, surrounded by dear friends and family. Char learned just a few weeks ago that her prognosis was limited and had begun the process of obtaining medications under Oregon’s law. While having options brought Char immeasurable comfort, in the end, she did not use the medication.
We will miss Char’s energy and passion for our cause. She was a maverick whose legacy will continue to bring comfort to those seeking good end-of-life care. In 2002, Char's decision to sign on as a patient plaintiff in defense of Oregon's law put her life in the national spotlight. She become an invaluable spokesperson who spoke with passion and a raw candor to reporters (and anyone who would listen) about the personal & political importance of end-of-life choice.
"Char took her place in a line of people fighting for Oregon's law and all the people who come after her who will receive enormous comfort just from knowing it is there," said Barbara Coombs Lee, President of Compassion & Choices. "Char was there for them."
07.28.06:New York Governor George E. Pataki, Vetoes Landmark Pain Bill
On July 26, 2006, after the New York State Legislature had unanimously passed the Palliative Care Education and Training Act, Governor George E. Pataki vetoed the bill, ending three years of work to better serve New York's citizens.
The bill was designed to improve palliative care and pain management, the first of its kind in the nation. Initiated by Compassion & Choices, the legislation addressed the urgent public health care crisis of the undertreatment of pain.
It is unclear at this time as to why the Governor chose to veto. There remains the possibility of an override by the New York Legislature.
06.27.06:The California Senate Judiciary Committee Rejects Compassionate Choice
We are heavy hearted today. Lawmakers in Sacramento failed us and they failed the people they serve. Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Joseph Dunn voted with the Republican minority to defeat AB 651. When politicians know a cause is just and vote against it, the system has failed. We had every reason to count Joe Dunn as an “aye” vote. We’ll never know how and why his vote changed, but it was not because our bill lacked merit, or popular support, or compelling testimony or cogent arguments.
Dunn told the packed room he feared the role of big money in politics, but big money won with his vote. California Medical Association, Catholic political operatives and Catholic hospitals got the outcome they wanted. These forces imposed their will on the state, defying 70% of its residents and dozens of strong advocates besides ourselves, including ACLU, NOW, the Council on Aging, Older Women’s League and the 500,000 member Congress of California Seniors.
We are heart broken for the sake of those like Tom McDonald, dying of melanoma, who pleaded with Dunn for a safe and peaceful option to the horrific death he faces. But in the end we are not disheartened.
Here is why:
Over the past 18 months we’ve moved the cause of Compassionate Choices to the front of public consciousness. We won the support of every major newspaper, high profile officials like Senator Diane Feinstein and a multitude of organizations and opinion leaders who had never thought seriously about aid in dying before.
This campaign won high marks for its intelligence, vigor, integrity and heart. Political observers know ours is a disciplined, creative and determined force for social change. And even our opponents suspect aid in dying will be legal everywhere one day. One set back can’t turn the tide.
We have met and welcomed many thousands of good and kind people to our cause, who will carry the memory of a campaign for compassion and choice, their whole lives. Doctors, attorneys, ministers and others of strong faith, nurses and social workers, families like yours and thousands more like you, bring understanding and compassion to the world because you helped fight this fight for human dignity and against needless suffering. Now we are connected and we will continue to stand up together for our values and beliefs.
Gratitude overwhelms us. Supporters too numerous to name, gave so much. So many of you traveled far, enlisted friends, dedicated your expertise and made this campaign possible with your spirit, wisdom and generous gifts of time and money. You showed up strong and spoke your truth. We will never forget your enormous generosity and hard work.
We're heartened to recall other struggles for social justice, and know we stand in a long line of campaigners who faced losses and never gave up. Society moves slowly and some never live to see their dream of freedom realized. Elizabeth Cady Stanton dedicated a lifetime to women’s suffrage, yet never cast a vote. As individuals we never know the full impact of our good works. Acts of kindness and mercy ripple through the world, and this brave campaign has its own enduring effect.
06.22.06:Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) Supports Compassionate Choices Act in California
Today, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) the nation’s leading Latino legal organization, endorsed legislative efforts to secure the right of terminally ill patients to make their own end of life choices.
“The California Compassionate and Choices Act”, AB 651 would ensure that all terminally ill patients in California have equal access to quality medical care and treatment—including a full commitment to the broad continuum of care, especially hospice and every modality of excellent palliative care.
06.20.06:Californians for Compassionate Choice testify before the California Senate Judiciary Committee
Today the Senate Judiciary Committee, chaired by Senator Joe Dunn, holds the first of 2 hearings on AB 651. Today’s hearing is short, 12:00 noon – 1:30, and it will focus on bio-ethical issues. Our witnesses are Professor Ben Rich from University of California Davis, Dr. Nicholas L Gideonse, of Oregon Health and Science University and Dr. Richard, Ikeda, Medical Director of Health for All. Wesley Smith, fellow at the Discovery Institute, is the lead witness in opposition.
We know a formal hearing does not provide the full impact of our case for support of AB 651. Therefore, Dr. Gideonse and Dr. Ikeda also are appearing at a press conference in the Capitol today at 11:00 AM – 11:30. Dr. Gideonse will speak of his experience with elderly, dying patients who have been comforted by the assurance of a peaceful end of life. Dr. Ikeda will speak of the patients he cares for, elderly, frail, and deserving of the same assurance when they approach the end of their lives.
The second Judiciary hearing is next week—June 27th. This will be a full hearing and VOTE. If you can make it, please come to Sacramento and attend this hearing. A roomful of supporters is the best argument we can put forward!
Wednesday, June 14 the San Francisco went public with its long-standing position of neutrality on aid in dying. The statement is important as an example of the principled, non-dogmatic approach organized medicine should take toward end of life choice. Thank you to the San Francisco Medical Society for adopting this compassionate position.
05.23.06:On Friday, May 19, 2006 Sen. Brownback, chair of a Judiciary subcommittee of the U.S. Senate, announced a hearing to be held six days later, on “assisted suicide and euthanasia.”
Three witnesses, Compassion & Choices Legal Director Kathryn Tucker, Oregon Hospice Association Executive Director Ann Jackson and family member Julie McMurchie presented the reality of Oregon’s experience with legal aid in dying. They testified to the comfort and hope the law brings to dying patients and how hospice and palliative care has thrived and grown in the past eight years in Oregon.
05.08.06:Compassion & Choices applauds the Abigail Alliance for Better Access to Developmental Drugs and the Washington Legal Foundation
As the nation's leading organization dedicated to improving the care of terminally ill patients and advocating for excellent end of life care, Compassion & Choices applauds the successful effort by the Abigail Alliance for Better Access to Developmental Drugs and the Washington Legal Foundation to remove barriers to patient access to potentially life extending medications. The plaintiffs in this case sought removal of a federal regulatory bar to patient access to medications that had passed an initial review for efficacy and safety (referred to as "Post Phase I" drugs), which might offer life saving or extending benefits to some terminally ill patients. The decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT, issued May 2, 2006 (No. 04-5350) empowers the patients to make an informed choice about whether to seek and consume such medications.
Instrumental in the Court's ruling were two cases that Compassion & Choices litigated: Washington v.Glucksberg, 521 U.S. 702, 710 (1997), and Gonzales v. Oregon, 126 S.Ct. 904, 922-23 (2006). The D.C. Circuit relied upon both of these decisions as authority in reaching its decision.
05.05.06:New Report from New York University Law School
We have available a new report, Law, Medicine and Morality: Implications of the Terri Schiavo case. In March 2006 Compassion & Choices joined the MergerWatch Project and the Arthur Garfield Hays Civil Liberties Program of New York University Law School to present findings and raise awareness of the Religious Right’s new assault on end-of-life decisions.
04.27.06:Endorsement from California Senator Diane Feinstein
Today California Senator Diane Feinstein put her enormous political credibility and stature behind the Compassionate Choices Act, pending in the California legislature. Assembly member Patty Berg received a letter of full endorsement and support.
This marks a sea change in the national politics of Compassion & Choices advocacy.
03.30.06:The Washington State Department of Health will set up a secure, Web-based registry of living wills and other health care directives
Under the measure Gov. Christine Gregoire signed into law, legal documents spelling out Washingtonians' wishes for end-of-life medical care could be directly entered into the online registry, where they could be accessed or rescinded at any time.
The health agency also will post living wills, medical power of attorney orders and other such health directives to the site on behalf of Washingtonians who send their documents to the state.
03.28.06:Advocates for patients’ rights warn against restrictive post-Schiavo legislation; call for policies to ensure that patients’ wishes be honored
One year after Terri Schiavo’s husband, Michael, won a legal battle for the right to have her wishes respected and a feeding tube removed, two national patients’ rights organizations warned today about the danger of legislation introduced in 23 states that would make honoring patients’ wishes to forgo life-sustaining treatment more difficult.
A list of 49 proposed laws introduced in 2005 and 2006 state legislative sessions was released by the MergerWatch Project and Compassion & Choices, two organizations dedicated to protecting patients’ rights to self-determination.
03.17.06:Another Win for Compassion & Choices' Efforts to Relieve Suffering
With legal assistance from Compassion & Choices, Dr. Harold Luke, of Redlands, California, regained his right to practice medicine this week. The Medical Board had revoked Dr. Luke’s license for administering morphine to relieve a dying man’s agony. Compassion & Choices attorney Kathryn Tucker led an appeal and assembled a coalition of pain specialists to aid in Dr. Luke’s defense. This week the Board reconsidered, and issued a light reprimand instead.
03.09.06:The Oregon Department of Human Resources released its Eighth Annual Report on Oregon’s aid-in-dying law today
Thirty-eight Oregonians ended their lives under the Death with Dignity Act in 2005 compared to 37 who did so in the previous year, according to the eighth annual report released today by the Oregon Department of Human Services (DHS).
"Once again, our report shows little change in the demographics and characteristics among those who are using this law," said Mel Kohn, M.D., state epidemiologist. "And again, these deaths reflect a very small portion of the average 31,000 annual deaths in Oregon."
Physician aid-in-dying was legalized in 1997 and, since then, 246 Oregonians have used the law to hasten their death.
01.24.06:Compassion & Choices' co-CEO Barbara Coombs Lee weighs in on the Supreme Court ruling
In an article created for the Center for American Progress, Barbara Coombs Lee writes about how in Oregon, the liberal justices give us a lesson in judicial conservatism.
"The U.S. Supreme Court this week proved itself a surprising, and strong, ally in the ongoing fight against the Bush administration's desire to play doctor. As we honor Roe v. Wade's legacy of the right to conscience, bodily autonomy, and government non-interference with private decisions, it is appropriate that we celebrate this latest victory for personal freedom in the case of Gonzales v. Oregon."
01.20.06:Compassion & Choices launches the Alice Naumburg Proskauer Memorial Project
The purpose of Compassion & Choices’ Alice Naumburg Proskauer Project is to identify, recruit, organize and apply physician support for legalization of physician aid in dying for patients who request it. Such aid would be provided to those enduring unrelievable pain or suffering.
The project was established to honor the part Alice Naumburg Proskauer played in the founding of what today has become the “Choice in Dying Movement.”
01.17.06: Supreme Court Ruling A Defining Moment for Aid-in-Dying Law
The US Supreme Court ruled today in favor of choice at the end of life. In a 6 to 3 decision, the court ruled the Attorney General’s attempt to intervene in affairs of the state’s aid-in-dying law has exceeded his authority.
“This is a watershed decision for freedom and democracy in the U.S.,” says Barbara Coombs Lee, Co-CEO and president of Compassion & Choices. “It reaffirms the liberty, dignity and privacy Americans cherish at the end of life.”
“No government should threaten these rights nor usurp a state’s power to meet the needs of its dying citizens,” she says.
For now Oregon’s aid-in-dying law is safe. But Compassion & Choices’ efforts have just begun. We will defend any Congressional attack on the Oregon law while aggressively pursuing similar legislation throughout the nation. Please join us in our Compassion For A Nation campaign, an effort to ensure that every citizen in the Union is has the same freedoms Oregonians enjoy.
We will not stop until all Americans can live and die as free people, in dignity and according to their own values.
12.14.05: Compassion & Choices was delighted to participate at the historic White House Conference on Aging this week
When the White House requested that we consider appearing at the conference, and using the opportunity to educate Americans about the full range of choices we should have in the dying process, we were surprised, given this Administration's aggressive and untoward assault on the Oregon Death with Dignity Act. But the opportunity to demonstrate to people that we represent the majority of Americans—concerned about the dignity and quality of our final days--was too great to pass up. We are delighted to have had a booth, provided information, and educated hundreds of attendees at the Conference on how important preserving our end of life options are.
Members of the National Capital Area Chapter of Compassion & Choices staffed our booth. A number of viisitors to the booth identified themselves as members. Other visitors voiced appreciation for the work of our organization. Jim Lieberman, national board member of Compassion & Choices said, "It was clear that a number of delegates feel strongly about the issue and were glad to see us."
A House-Senate conference committee dropped a controversial provision Friday, that would have given the Drug Enforcement Administration authority to review and block the sale of new prescription narcotics including drugs that may relieve the severe pain of dying people.
Compassion & Choices is delighted to see the Food and Drug Administration retain authority over review of new pain medications. The DEA is a police agency, without medical expertise. It should not try to practice medicine or determine the proper use for medications in the context of medical practice.
11.01.05: Samuel Alito increases the chances of a protracted, divisive confirmation battle
President Bush's choice of Samuel Alito increases the chances of a protracted, divisive confirmation battle. Judge Alito has been described as a "conservative activist" and seems likely to attract strong opposition from civil rights and women's rights groups, among others. As we await a ruling in Gonzales v. Oregon, we continue to hope Justice O'Connor remains on the Court to deliberate and vote on this case.
10.28.05: Harriet Miers' departure could mean further delay in filling Supreme Court vacancy
The departure of Harriet Miers as candidate for the U.S, Supreme Court means further delay in filling the vacancy temporarily held by Justice O'Connor. During our own oral argument before the court October 5, Justice O'Connor asked questions reflecting a respect for states' authority in end-of-life care, including aid in dying. We hope she remains long enough to participate in the deliberation and voting on Gonzales v. Oregon.
10.24.05: Our good friend Don James died peacefully and naturally this weekend
Don believed passionately in his right to make his own end-of-life decisions. He took this belief all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court as a patient/intervenor in Gonzales v. Oregon. It was an honor for the Compassion & Choices legal team to represent his views. He is the twelfth Compassion & Choices patient to die during our long journey through Federal courts defending Oregon's aid in dying law. We remember his courage, his determination and his zest for life that enriched his life to the very end.
10.05.05: Informative questions from the bench during oral arguments
Questions from the bench during oral arguments on October 5 convince us the Court is unlikely to uphold the Ashcroft Directive. The Justices appear reluctant to read the Controlled Substances so broadly. Several Justices repeatedly asked how Congress had empowered the Attorney General to preempt Oregon's law. With no sufficient answer, it seems clear the Attorney General exceeded his authority.
09.20.05:It is not only what you say but how you say it
Is the press negatively influencing debate and dialogue on end-of-life choices by the words it uses? McKinleyville Press columnist Elizabeth Alves believes it is.
09.14.05:New Orleans Statement released by Compassion & Choices
Barbara Coombs Lee, Co-CEO Compassion & Choices, realeses a statement concerning news accounts indicating physicians
in New Orleans may have intentionally given lethal medication to patients who
were dying, who were in agony and could not be evacuated.
09.12.05: Dr. Harold Luke, of Redlands, CA, investigated
Dr. Harold Luke, of Redlands, CA endured investigation and disciplinary proceedings after a nurse reported her concern that a patient died shortly after Dr. Luke ordered increased morphine, which was easing the patient’s breathlessness. The medical Board of California investigated and decided to revoke Dr. Luke’s license. Facing mounting concern among the state’s palliative care providers, the board has stayed its action temporarily.
08.29.05: The U.S. Supreme Court will hear Gonzales v. Oregon, the current pivotal case for supporters of choice in dying, on October 5
Oral arguments are scheduled to commence at 10:00 a.m. on this date. Compassion & Choices is co-counsel to a group of terminally ill Oregonians, who want to have the option of legal aid in dying. These people join the State of Oregon Attorney General and an Oregon physician in defending the law from federal intrusion. Compassion & Choices will host a briefing following the hearing on October 5. You can be part of the briefing. Dial 800.270.1433. This is a conference call style briefing. Compassion & Choices’ staff and attorneys will provide an analysis of the court proceedings starting at 1 PM Eastern Daylight Time. Join us.
Drawing on her medical expertise and her own observations of the ill religious leader, Pavanelli determined that the failure to insert a feeding tube until just days before his death hastened the Pope’s demise. She also asserts that he himself refused a feeding tube.
“People of different faiths all agree that life is sacred and worthy of respect and preservation as long as possible,” said Rev. Ignacio Castuera, minister of Trinity United Methodist Church in Pomona, Calif., who spoke at the Los Angeles event. “However, when death is imminent, it is entirely respectful to the sanctity of life to allow a person to decide for himself or herself when and how they can ease their pain and suffering in a dignified manner.”
It’s been eight years since Dr. Jack Kevorkian was sent to prison for second-degree murder for administering life-ending medication to Thomas Youk. Youk had ALS, or Lou Gehrig’s disease, and no safe, legal options for hastening his death. Instead, he was forced into a “back alley” out of fear of prolonged suffering. 
Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney said in a television interview this week that matters such as the Terri Schiavo case are best left to the courts.
Geoffry Nunberg, linguist at UC Berkeley's School of Information, and author of Talking Right, discussing the appropriateness of using the word "suicide" when referring to aid-in-dying. He writes in the Los Angeles Times:
Pulitzer Prize-winning humorist Art Buchwald died peacefully at his son’s home in Washington, D.C. on January 17 at the age of 81 from kidney failure. Buchwald made headlines a year ago by making the conscious choice to die by refusing life-sustaining kidney dialysis treatments.
With a promise not to assist in any more deaths, Dr. Jack Kevorkian will be paroled in June of 2007. 
Jean H. Gillett, a passionate supporter of the choice in dying movement, has died at her home in Palo Alto, Calif. at the age of 89.
Rev. Ignacio Castuera, Ph.D. has been named the 2006 recipient of the Hugh Gallagher Award which recognizes a person within the choice-in-dying movement who is a driving force in bringing people, especially those of diverse age, race, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation and persons with physical disabilities, to our issues and organization.
Sandy Bush, a Compassion & Choices client and inspiring spokesperson, died peacefully at home in Colorado on Oct. 1, 2006. He was surrounded by his family and the mountain landscape he loved.
On July 26, 2006, after the New York State Legislature had unanimously passed the Palliative Care Education and Training Act, Governor George E. Pataki vetoed the bill, ending three years of work to better serve New York's citizens.
We are heavy hearted today. Lawmakers in Sacramento failed us and they failed the people they serve. Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Joseph Dunn voted with the Republican minority to defeat AB 651. When politicians know a cause is just and vote against it, the system has failed. We had every reason to count Joe Dunn as an “aye” vote. We’ll never know how and why his vote changed, but it was not because our bill lacked merit, or popular support, or compelling testimony or cogent arguments.
Under the measure Gov. Christine Gregoire signed into law, legal documents spelling out Washingtonians' wishes for end-of-life medical care could be directly entered into the online registry, where they could be accessed or rescinded at any time.
The purpose of Compassion & Choices’ Alice Naumburg Proskauer Project is to identify, recruit, organize and apply physician support for legalization of physician aid in dying for patients who request it. Such aid would be provided to those enduring unrelievable pain or suffering.
When the White House requested that we consider appearing at the conference, and using the opportunity to educate Americans about the full range of choices we should have in the dying process, we were surprised, given this Administration's aggressive and untoward assault on the Oregon Death with Dignity Act. But the opportunity to demonstrate to people that we represent the majority of Americans—concerned about the dignity and quality of our final days--was too great to pass up. We are delighted to have had a booth, provided information, and educated hundreds of attendees at the Conference on how important preserving our end of life options are.