A second public hearing has been set for April 6 at 3 p.m. on a bill to legalize doctor-prescribed suicide in Alaska, while making taxpayers fund the deaths.
The first round of public comment on March 28 was filled with emotional testimony from both sides. Sponsored by Anchorage Democrat Rep. Harriet Drummond, House Bill 54 would permit doctors to prescribe lethal doses of powerful drugs to patients for the purpose of killing themselves.
Drummond and her legislative aid give a general overview of the bill to the House Health & Social Services Committee, after which the committee took public comments from 13 people — seven in favor and six against.
Drummond attempted to distance her proposal from its commonly known name — “assisted suicide” — preferring to talk about the bill in terms of helping a sick person to die on his or her own terms.
But Margaret Dore, an attorney from Washington State where assisted suicide is legal, said advocates of doctor-proscribed suicide are misleading the public about the real impact on society’s most vulnerable.
Dore, who is also president of Choice is an Illusion — a non-profit that opposes assisted suicide and euthanasia — said House Bill 54 does not deal only with those who are dying.
The assisted suicide bill in Oregon, which the Alaska bill closely resembles, lists diabetes as a “terminal illness,” Dore cautioned.
“We’re not talking about people who are dying,” she said. “It is misleading to talk about aid in dying.”
Dore then warned of how easy it is to abuse doctor-prescribed suicide laws.
“Whose choice is it?” she asked. “The bill is stacked against the patient.”
As an inheritance lawyer she said she sees family members do “terrible things” to each other at the end of life, especially when money or financial burdens are at stake.
Dore warned of the “complete lack of oversight” at the moment when someone takes lethal drugs to stop their heart. House Bill 54 also contains dangerous language she pointed out.
“This bill, your bill, allows for euthanasia,” she said. “The bill says the patient ‘may’ self terminate, or ‘may’ terminate their life, with the medication but it’s not required (that they be the ones to end their life).”
Others who spoke out against the bill included Michael Pauley, of the Alaska Family Council, who said the bill puts the most vulnerable in great jeopardy.
“Similar to assisted suicide laws enacted in other states, HB 54 contains no mandatory requirement that individuals seeking a lethal drug prescription be referred for psychiatric consultation,” he noted. “This is despite the fact that 80 to 90 percent of suicides are connected with clinical depression or other mental health issues that can be treated.”
“Suicidal thoughts should be interpreted as a cry for help,” he added.
Pauley noted that physician assisted suicide “corrupts the practice of medicine.”
“Physicians have taken the Hippocratic Oath for many centuries,” he continued. “It states in part ‘I will keep the sick from harm and injustice. I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody who asks for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect.’”
Lastly, Pauley warned of a slippery slope.
“If those deemed to be terminally ill have a personal autonomy right to receive lethal drugs, then why not the chronically ill? Why not the profoundly disabled? Why not the depressed?” he asked. “The experience of assisted suicide and euthanasia in Europe shows that these ethical landmines are real, not imaginary. In 2012, twin brothers Marc and Eddy Verbessem were euthanized in Belgium at their own request when they discovered they had a condition that would eventually cause them to go blind. The brothers decided that they would rather be killed than live their lives without vision. “
House Bill 54 allows for doctor-prescribed suicide on Alaskans with a “terminal” condition or who are expected to die within six months — though such predictions are notoriously unreliable and could include people with chronic illness or disabilities not receiving appropriate treatment.
Most supporters of House Bill 54 said they backed the legislation because it can help alleviate the suffering and pain that someone feels at the end of life.
Pain, however, is not the reason most opt for physician-assisted suicide. According to the Oregon Health Authority’s “Death with Dignity Act Annual Reports,” in 2015, over 90 percent of patients cited “losing the ability to engage in activities making life enjoyable” and “losing autonomy,” and 48 percent cited being a “burden” on family, friends or caregivers.
Most victims are vulnerable elders. “It seems solitary, dependent and chronically ill seniors are prime candidates for assisted suicide in Oregon,” the U.S. bishops’ conference notes. Physical and psychological pain is treatable.
According to a report by the National Institutes of Health: “…if all patients had access to careful assessment and optimal symptom control and supportive care, the suffering of most patients with life-threatening illnesses could be reduced sufficiently to eliminate their desire for hastened death.”
Kat West serves as the national director of policy and programs for the pro-assisted suicide organization, Compassion and Choices. At the March 28 hearing she was asked about how physician prescribed suicide would be funded in Alaska.
West noted that a 1997 law prohibits federal funding of the practice and suggested that Alaska would need to fund physician-prescribed suicide with state funds through the local Medicaid matching program.
'April 6: 2nd public hearing on doctor-prescribed suicide for Alaskans'
Be the first to comment on this post!has no comments