End-of-Life Choice, Palliative Care and Counseling

Posts Tagged ‘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 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/

Apr 17, 2013Huge Victory: Aid in Dying Preserved in Montana

by Compassion & Choices staff
April 17, 2013

Choice at life’s end scored a major victory yesterday! The Montana Senate defeated a bill to criminalize aid in dying, which was made legal by the 2009 state Supreme Court ruling in Baxter v. Montana.

As a Compassion & Choices supporter, you share credit for this impressive win. We prevailed against anti-choice zealots who worked for more than three years to undo the landmark Baxter ruling and quash the right of terminally ill Montanans to die with dignity on their own terms.

Make no mistake: This is a resounding victory for Compassion & Choices, our supporters in Montana and across the country, and for the principle of self-determination. Please take a few moments to savor it and the extraordinary effort that made it possible.

1) The Montana Senate actually reversed course to defeat HB505. We called it the “Physician Imprisonment Act of 2013″ because it would have incarcerated doctors for up to 10 years for providing aid in dying to terminal patients. Once predicted to pass, the bill was defeated instead, by a bipartisan vote of 27-23.

2) The Senate vote was the direct result of sustained on-the-ground activism by Compassion & Choices Montana. For more than two years, this dynamic campaign fielded staff and volunteers to alert residents to the threat of HB505. Its multi-tactical campaign included:

• an education drive that reached tens of thousands of Montanans in all corners of the state and encouraged them to telephone their legislators and otherwise make their voice heard;
radio and print ads urging Montanans to contact their legislators to oppose the bill;
outreach to newspaper editorial boards and other opinion leaders, and an aggressive letter-to-the-editor campaign;
mobilization of doctors to publicly oppose the bill and affirm their support for the practice of aid in dying;
in-person lobbying of lawmakers in Helena and their home districts;
social media and other efforts to spread the word and summon voters to action.

3) A high point in our campaign came when long-time supporter Dr. Eric Kress, a family physician at Western Montana Clinic, publicly disclosed that he had written aid-in-dying prescriptions for three of his patients since the 2009 Baxter decision.

Dr. Kress narrated our radio ad, appeared in print ads, authored a powerful op-ed for The Missoulian newspaper and delivered courageous testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee. We cannot overstate the importance of his eloquent and persuasive support, and the influence it had on lawmakers and the public alike.

4) We backed up our advocacy with a poll of Montana voters, which confirmed that 73 percent opposed HB505 and 67 percent were less likely to vote for a legislator who supported it.

5) The victory maintains Montana’s status as the third state where aid in dying is expressly legal. That status was the direct result of Compassion & Choices’ landmark Baxter v. Montana lawsuit, which confirmed that physician aid in dying did not violate state public policy in Montana.

6) The victory also underscores the growing level of public willingness to take personal action to defend the right to death with dignity, and to oppose zealots who seek to pass draconian laws like HB505 and use misinformation, scare tactics, moral judgments and other means to deny people their most sacred rights at life’s end.

Special thanks goes to the thousands of Montanans who took action to defeat HB505, and to hundreds of Compassion & Choices Montana volunteers who worked the phones, knocked on doors, talked to neighbors and loved ones, and otherwise devoted themselves to make sure that truth and reason prevailed.

Without our shared commitment, HB505 would be law today. The fact that it isn’t is a true testament to the leadership of Compassion & Choices Montana and the dedication of our wonderful supporters.

BCL and JG Sign

Apr 15, 2013Bill to Imprison Doctors for Aid in Dying Defeated in Montana Legislature

CONTACT: Sean Crowley, 202-550-6524, seancrowley57@gmail.com
Jessica Grennan, 202-699-2738, JGrennan@compassionandchoices.org

Senate Reverses Course from Last Week

(Helena, Mont. – Apr. 15, 2013) The nation’s leading end-of-life choice advocacy group, Compassion & Choices, praised the Montana Senate today for reversing course and rejecting a House-passed bill that would imprison doctors for up to 10 years if they provide aid in dying to terminally ill patients. The 27-23 bipartisan vote against the so-called Doctor Imprisonment Act, HB505, came after both Democrats and Republicans spoke out against the legislation. Just last week, the Senate voted 31-17 to approve a motion to “blast” the legislation out of committee to the Senate floor.

“This bipartisan vote is a win for Montanans and the doctors who honor the wishes of their terminally ill patients by supporting their choice to die with dignity on their own terms,” 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 1994 Oregon Death with Dignity Act. “The legislature did the right thing by honoring the wishes of the vast majority of Montanans who don’t want the government dictating their medical treatment at the end of their lives. Today’s vote is in line with the national trend to approve aid in dying, not criminalize it.”

If HB 505 had become law, it would have gutted a 2009 Montana Supreme Court ruling in Baxter v. Montana, a case brought by Compassion & Choices. The court confirmed it does not violate state public policy in Montana for a physician to provide aid in dying to a mentally competent, terminally ill adult.

“If HB505 had passed, I could have gone to prison for providing the medical care my terminally ill patients request,” said Dr. Eric Kress, a family physician at Western Montana Clinic, who has written aid in dying prescriptions for three patients since the Baxter decision. Kress narrated a statewide radio campaign opposing HB 505, appeared in print ads featuring quotes from other doctors opposed to HB 505 and authored an oped opposing HB 505 published last week in The Missoulian. “The overwhelmingly positive public support I have received has strengthened my resolve to ensure this right is never taken away.”

In contrast to Montana, efforts promoting patient choice at the end-of-life are underway in numerous other diverse states, including Kansas, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, and Vermont. In February, the Vermont Senate gave final approval to a “Death with Dignity” bill that would protect doctors from criminal or civil liability when treating terminally ill patients who choose to end their lives.

A national poll last May by Republican pollster Frank Luntz showed 84 percent of voters agree that: “How a terminally ill person chooses to end his/her life should be an individual decision and not a government decision.”

A poll of 605 likely Montana voters conducted this month by Global Strategy Group shows 73 percent of them oppose HB 505, including 81 percent of Democrats, 74 percent of Independents and 64 percent of Republicans. The poll also reveals that 67 percent of voters will be less likely to vote for a legislator who supported HB 505, including 53 percent who said they will be much less likely. Nearly seven out 10 voters (69%) support allowing a mentally competent adult who is dying of a terminal disease and in extreme pain to choose to end his or her life in a humane and dignified way, including 48% who strongly support such a choice.