End-of-Life Choice, Palliative Care and Counseling

Legal Aid in Dying

May 20, 2013Vermont Gov. Signs First Death-with-Dignity Law Passed by Legislature in Nation

CONTACT: Sean Crowley
202-550-6524
, scrowley@compassionandchoices.org 

by Compassion & Choices staff

Historic Achievement is Breakthrough in Death-with-Dignity Movement

(Washington, D.C. – May 20, 2013) Vermont Gov. Peter Shumlin’s signing into law at 2pm today of the nation’s first death-with-dignity bill passed by a legislature is a “breakthrough” moment, according to the nation’s leading end-of-life choice advocacy group, Compassion & Choices. Vermont also will become the first eastern state and fourth state nationwide where aid in dying clearly is legal and accessible starting immediately.

“This historic achievement is a political breakthrough that will boost support for death-with-dignity bills nationwide,” said Compassion & Choices President Barbara Coombs Lee, an ER and ICU nurse and physician assistant for 25 years who co-authored the nation’s first Death-with-Dignity law in Oregon and was a senior advisor on the successful campaign to pass the Death-with-Dignity law in Washington state, both of which were approved by citizen-passed ballot initiatives and served as models for the Vermont legislation.

The Vermont law will let dying, mentally competent people determine when they have endured enough suffering and empowers them to end their lives with dignity. Specifically, it will provide criminal, civil and professional protections for physicians who prescribe medication to mentally competent, terminally ill patients that they can ingest to achieve a peaceful death.

“Gov. Shumlin and Vermont legislators have shattered a barrier by becoming the first politicians to show the courage to enact a death-with-dignity law,” added Coombs Lee.  “Given the high margin of public support for end-of-life choices nationwide, it is only amatter of time before legislatures in Massachusetts,New Jersey, and other states that are currently considering death-with-dignity bills enact them into law.”

Oregon and Washington enacted aid-in-dying laws thru citizen-passed ballot initiatives in 1994 and 2008, respectively. In 2009, the Montana Supreme Court ruled in a case brought by Compassion & Choices, Baxter v. Montana, that the state’s public policy supports mentally competent, terminally ill patients being able to choose aid in dying.

The Vermont law will have requirements similar to the Oregon and Washington laws, but the Vermont requirements will expire after a three-year period. Then the Vermont law will follow the model in Montana, where professional practice standards have successfully governed the practice of aid in dying.

May 15, 2013“Doctor, Please Help me Die”

by Barbara Coombs Lee
May 15, 2013

Dr. Tom Preston, a Compassion & Choices leader in Seattle, chose these poignant words for the title of his new book. They are powerful words, gripping even on paper. Imagine them emerging from the lips of a patient, perhaps one whom the doctor has treated over decades, who is now dying of cancer. They strike right at the core of a physician’s identity, training and moral compass.

Preston knows well that each person, each healer and each caregiver responds to such a request from patient or loved one from the deepest parts of their own authentic being. He begins his book quoting Dumbledore, who in the last Harry Potter book pleaded with Snape to cut his dying short. “You alone know whether it will harm your soul to help an old man avoid pain and humiliation,” the wizard tells his reluctant friend. So it is with every doctor In America.

I recall hearing Dr. Peter Goodwin, Compassion & Choices’ leader and dear friend who died last March, describe how his “blood ran cold” the first time he heard these words. He responded to his patient he could not, but spent the remainder of his life regretting that answer.

Last month Dr. Eric Kress testified to the Montana legislature that when he refused the first patient who asked for his help in dying, the patient reacted in disgust and called him a coward. Thus began his own soulful rumination and his decision not to abandon subsequent patients who asked for his help. “What kind of man am I?” he asked himself. “What kind of doctor am I?”

Preston writes from his long and passionate interest in how doctors respond to this plea. By extension, he is also vitally interested in the historic and potential relationship between the field of Medicine and patients who yearn for choice and control in their dying. Today, it’s mostly a dysfunctional relationship. But it has not always been so, and this book may well help heal the dysfunction.

Preston is a fine writer, and a splendid historian. I greatly enjoy his reaches into ancient Greece and Medicine’s dawn as a profession. In one enlightening chapter he traces the transformation of medical oaths, “From Hippocrates to Lasagna,” to demonstrate how politics, religions and accidents of history influence the words and meanings that endure, even when at odds with ancient precepts or practices. Personally, I’ve always been fascinated to observe that sometime in the course of history the caduceus, symbol of Mercury, god of thieves and business, came to replace the staff of Asclepius, son of Apollo and the first mortal healer, as the symbol of Medicine. (That’s right, the patron god of financial gain stands as the profession’s symbol in modern times.)

Another of Preston’s great contributions is his concentration on “patient-centeredness” as the mark of excellent care. Preston acknowledges that his colleagues may pay lip service to the term, while actually delivering “physician-centered” service. Therefore he takes care to advocate a “meaningful” patient-centered approach. One of the speakers at this year’s TEDMED conference noted that even “patient-centered care” can mean that professionals circle the patient and impose a one-way dialogue.

Non-physician readers will find in Preston’s words the reassurance, courage and tools to approach their doctors with legitimate requests arising from their experience in health and in decline. Physician readers will find compassion and gentle guidance in adopting an open and responsive attitude toward the needs of their dying patients. Physicians across the nation are examining their position on intention and assistance in dying, and this book is bound to help.

May 14, 2013Vermont Becomes First Legislature to Approve Death-with-Dignity Legislation

by Compassion & Choices Staff

CONTACT: Sean Crowley, 202-550-6524
scrowley@compassionandchoices.org

Politics Shift as Lawmakers Embrace Nationwide Support for End-of-Life Choices

(Washington, D.C. – May 13, 2013) The nation’s leading end-of-life choice advocacy group, Compassion & Choices, praised the Vermont legislature for becoming the first legislative body in the nation to approve death-with-dignity legislation. Gov. Peter Shumlin has vowed to sign the bill into law.

“This historic legislative victory proves that the aid-in-dying issue is no longer the third rail of politics. In fact, it’s a winning issue on which Gov. Shumlin campaigned,” said Compassion & Choices President Barbara Coombs Lee, an ER and ICU nurse and physician assistant who co-authored the nation’s first Death-with-Dignity law in Oregon and was a senior advisor for the nation’s second Death-with-Dignity law in Washington state, both approved by ballot initiatives. “We congratulate Patient Choices Vermont for its leadership of this multi-year campaign. Their success shows aid in dying has become a legislative winner.”

“Legislators now are embracing the high margin of public support for end-of-life choices nationwide,” added Coombs Lee.  “This bill’s passage should enable legislatures in Massachusetts, New Jersey and other states that are considering aid-in-dying bills to approve them.”

The Vermont bill provides criminal, civil and professional protections for physicians who prescribe medication to mentally competent, terminally ill patients that they can ingest to achieve a peaceful death.  It has requirements similar to the Oregon and Washington laws, but the Vermont requirements would expire after a 3-year period and then professional practice standards would govern the practice of aid in dying.

“Professional practice standards have successfully governed aid in dying in Montana for three years, and for the past two years in Hawaii,” said Compassion & Choices Legal Affairs Director Kathryn Tucker, who testified before both the Vermont House and Senate in favor of the bill and was co-counsel in a landmark case, Baxter v. Montana, in which the Montana Supreme Court ruled in 2009 that the public policy of the state supports mentally competent, terminally ill patients being able to choose aid in dying. “Professional practice standards guide all of medicine and it is appropriate for aid in dying to be governed in this manner.”

 

May 10, 2013A Mother’s “Joyous Goodbye”

Dear Friends,

My mother, Gabrielle, was 90 when her husband of 64 years passed on. Although hardly able to walk by that time, she still read the Times, played chess, enjoyed a couple of cocktails and loved chatting, all on a daily basis.

Slowly, over the next four years, mom became more frustrated about her diminishing ability to remember what she read earlier in the day. Her chess games lasted only a few moves before becoming surreal, and she resented the coaxing to get her out of bed. She was running on empty.

She mentioned every other month or so that she really wished she “didn’t have to be here anymore.” Her eyes deteriorated; she couldn’t read anymore. Then her headaches began.

Even as she maintained a stoic attitude, she would remark that “hanging around like this is absurd,” adding: “This is not what daddy would have wanted.” The headaches were coming more often, sometimes keeping her awake through the night. As scary as they were, they were to be the key to her escape.

Mom’s doctor responded to her worsening situation with awesome empathy and respect. When she asked him to help her “find a way out of this predicament,” he told her that if she went on a “hunger strike” she would decline fairly rapidly into a coma and death. But there would be pain. However, he promised her that once she had consciously refused food and water for 24 hours, he would provide her with medication to provide relief and sedation. I went over these possibilities with mom to make sure that she understood clearly the option being offered to her. She did, and she vacillated for some time between her own genetically programmed optimism, fear of dying, and the logic that dictated that she “get out now” while she was still in “almost one piece.”

A month later, Mom invited her kids and grandchildren over for a “joyous goodbye.” She lay on the sofa with her poodle, a vodka gimlet at hand. It was a love-in, punctuated by laughter, tears and straight talk. (See photo above from that day.) Two nights later I got a call from her nurse. Mom was crying from the incessant pain and needed me. When I got to her apartment, I sat by her bedside, held her hand and stroked her head. We had talked enough about “the way out.” I suggested to her that this was the right time. She nodded her head between sobs: “Please.”

I am so deeply indebted to the doctor and his colleagues who made it possible for my mother to end her life consciously, and with her personality intact.

Jaime Longhi
West Cornwall, CT

P.S. I hope you will join me in honoring the mothers in your life — as I’m honoring my mother, Gabrielle — this Mother’s Day, with a gift to Compassion & Choices, whose work makes it possible for elders like my mom to die as they lived — on their own terms.

May 2, 2013Montel Williams Speaks Out for Death with Dignity in New Issue of Compassion & Choices Magazine

CONTACT: Sean Crowley, 202-550-6524
seancrowley57@gmail.com

by Compassion & Choices staff
May 2, 2013

TV Host Calls End-of-Life Choice for Terminally Ill “Personal Decision”

(Washington, D.C.) Emmy Award-winning television host Montel Williams advocates for end-of-life choice, including aid in dying, in the spring issue of Compassion & Choices Magazine. Williams, who revealed in 1999 that he has multiple sclerosis (MS) and is an active healthcare advocate, expressed support for the right of terminally ill people with unbearable suffering to control the time and manner of their death.

Appearing on the cover and in the magazine’s “Voice of Choice” column, Williams states, “I do not believe people should be deciding what level of pain other people should endure, especially knowing they have no chance for recovery. It is a personal decision.”

As the nation’s oldest and largest nonprofit organization working to improve care and expand choice at the end of life, Compassion & Choices advocates access to aid in dying for qualified individuals. Mentally competent, terminally ill patients should be allowed to receive a prescription from their doctor for medication to self-administer if they choose, to achieve a peaceful death. Opponents inaccurately label this “assisted suicide.” Williams debunks that description.

“It is not assisting suicide. I have thought this out, including for myself, and I’ve had many discussions with members of my family. … I’m also aware that my disease is going to progress. And there may be a day when I am told I have a finite amount of time left on this planet and when I may be in incredible pain. So when that time comes, I don’t care what anybody thinks or calls it. It’s my decision. And if I choose to go, then that’s my call.”

Like Compassion & Choices, Williams encourages families to discuss end-of-life matters before a crisis occurs. He advises that doctors participate in those discussions – but “their opinion or advice shouldn’t be given any more weight than that of others who need to be included in the discussion, including the patient’s sage counsel, psychiatrists, psychologists, their clergy or family members.”

“We are grateful to Montel for using his eloquent voice to inform people about the importance of end-of-life planning and of their right to control life’s final chapter,” said Compassion & Choices President Barbara Coombs Lee, a nurse and physician assistant for 25 years before becoming a private attorney and a Chief Petitioner of the first-in-the nation Oregon Death with Dignity Act in 1994. “Modern medicine has produced many life-saving achievements. Medicine can always do more. The question is whether they should, when a patient’s hope centers on dignity and comfort.”

Support for end-of-life choice is consistently strong in so-called red states and blue states and across demographic groups and religions. This strong support has held steady for two decades. A January 2011 Harris poll found that more than two-thirds (70%) of U.S. adults agree that “individuals who are terminally ill, in great pain and who have no chance for recovery, have the right to choose to end their own life.” A poll of likely New Jersey voters released last week found nearly two-thirds (63%) support allowing mentally competent, terminally ill adults with six months or less to live to receive a prescription for medication to end their suffering.

The full interview of Montel is available here:

http://viewer.zmags.com/publication/3d9a13e7#/3d9a13e7/24

The online edition of Compassion & Choices Magazine is available here:

http://viewer.zmags.com/publication/3d9a13e7#/3d9a13e7/1

Materials for advance healthcare planning are available here:

http://www.compassionandchoices.org/what-we-do/advance-planning/