Showing posts with label Margaret Dore. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Margaret Dore. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 5, 2021

California Amendments Seek to Weaken Patient Protections, Attestation Provisions Eliminated

Image result for "katy grimes"

By Margaret Dore, Esq.

On February 10, 2021, assisted suicide/euthanasia proponents introduced a bill seeking to amend California's End of Life Option Act. The bill, SB 380, eliminates the Act's 2026 sunset date, and also allows a 15 day waiting period to be shortened to 48 hours in certain circumstances.[1]

Katy Grimes, editor of the California Globe (pictured), had this to say:

When it comes to carrying out the death penalty for convicted murders, the California Legislature finds the lethal drug cocktails "cruel and unusual punishment," which they say is a violation of the Eighth Amendment. Yet lawmakers were more than willing to approve a lethal drug cocktail to allow sick people to kill themselves.  I wrote [this] in 2015 as the California Legislature was considering [passage of the Act].[2]

Monday, June 15, 2020

Australia: If Assisted Dying Is a Right, Must It Be Made Available to Everyone?

Queensland Parliament
By Margaret Dore, Esq.

A Queensland Australia Parliamentary Committee has made recommendations concerning voluntary assisted dying or VAD, meaning euthanasia and assisted suicide.[1]

Of special interest is the Committee's Recommendation 17, referring to "rights" of the patients to access VAD. The recommendation states:
The committee recommends that any voluntary assisted dying scheme in Queensland provides health practitioners who may have a conscientious objection to participating in voluntary assisted dying to opt not to participate, provided that the rights of the patients to access the scheme are also protected.  (Emphasis added).[2]

Friday, April 24, 2020

New Jersey Motion for Reconsideration

Margaret Dore
To view Dore's brief as submitted, click here.

I.   RELIEF REQUESTED

Margaret Dore moves for reconsideration of the Court’s order dated April 1, 2020, which upheld the constitutionality of the Medical Aid in Dying for the Terminally Ill Act.[1]

II. THE ACT MUST BE SET ASIDE

The Court did not reach the Act’s violation of the object in title rule, which is dispositive to set the Act aside. The Court should reach this issue now to overturn the Act.

The Court’s order states that Dore asked the Court to declare the Act unconstitutional “on grounds not asserted by plaintiffs.”[2] The plaintiffs, did, however, ask the Court to rule on the issue, stating:
Ms. Dore’s brief should be considered by the Court since if the law is unconstitutional under the single object rule, it should be the Court’s responsibility to raise that issue sua sponte even if not raised by Ms. Dore or the Plaintiffs.[3]
The Legislature understood that it was enacting a strictly voluntary law limited to assisted suicide for dying patients.[4] The prior judge expressed a similar view. See, for example, the transcript from the hearing on August 14, 2019 (“This case is not about euthanasia”).[5]

This case, however, is about euthanasia. The Act is also not limited to dying people. Patient voluntariness is allowed, but not required. These are material facts not disclosed by the Act’s title and related findings. The Act is unconstitutional and must be set aside.

Friday, March 27, 2020

Margaret Dore: Euthanasia Act "Must Be Set Aside"

E. David Smith
On March 24, 2020, a hearing was held in Glassman v Grewal, a lawsuit, which seeks to invalidate New Jersey's euthanasia law, formally known as the "Medical Aid in Dying for the Terminally Ill Act."

The specific matter before the court was a motion to dismiss brought by the defendant, New Jersey Attorney General, Gurbir S. Grewal.

The plaintiff, Joseph Glassman, represented by E. David Smith, opposed the motion, as did Margaret Dore, president of Choice is an Illusion, representing herself as amicus curiae.

Dore, who had filed both an amicus brief and a reply brief, argued that the Act must be set aside pursuant to the New Jersey Constitution. Her arguments largely tracked her reply brief, a portion of which is set forth below.

Thursday, December 26, 2019

New Jersey "Aid in Dying Act" Is Unconstitutional

To view the filed print version, including the appendix, click here.

I.  IDENTITY OF AMICUS

Margaret Dore is a licensed attorney in good standing in Washington State where assisted suicide is legal. She is appearing pro se.

Dore is a former Law Clerk to the Washington State Supreme Court and the Washington State Court of Appeals. She worked for a year with the United States Department of Justice and has been in private practice since 1990. She is also president of two nonprofit corporations opposed to assisted suicide and euthanasia: Choice is an Illusion, a 501(c)4 nonprofit corporation; and the Foundation for Choice is an Illusion, a 501(c)3 public charity.

Dore has personally appeared and testified against assisted suicide and/or euthanasia in at least 20 US legislatures, and also internationally. Her CV is attached in the appendix, at pages A-1 through A-4. For more information see www.margaretdore.org and www.choiceillusion.org.

II. STATEMENT OF RELIEF SOUGHT

Invalidation of the Medical Aid in Dying for the Terminally Ill Act (“the Act”).[1]

Saturday, November 23, 2019

Help Us Help You

Margaret Dore and Elaine Kolb,
after testifying in Connecticut
Choice is an Illusion and its president, Margaret Dore, work with other people and groups throughout the US and internationally, to stop and reverse the spread of legal assisted suicide and euthanasia.

Dore is a fourth generation lawyer in Washington State USA, where her work has included guardianship and family law.  She has seen the terrible things that people do to each other for money. This includes court-appointed guardians who steal from the very people they are charged to protect. 

Saturday, November 2, 2019

Speaking in Washington State USA

Margaret Dore
This evening, Margaret Dore, a lawyer and president of Choice is an Illusion, was the featured speaker at St. Louise Parish Hall in Bellevue, Washington State.

Her main topics included problems with assisted suicide in Washington and how to win in the future against legalization. She also discussed suicide contagion in Oregon.

To learn more about assisted suicide in Washington State, click herehere and here.

Special thanks to Debby Ummel who organized the event.

Saturday, April 6, 2019

American Nursing Association's Draft Position Statement Regarding Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide Is "Misleading and Dangerous"

By Margaret Dore, Esq., MBA

The ANA Center for Ethics and Human Rights Advisory Board is seeking public comment on a proposed position statement, "The Nurse's Role When a Patient Requests Aid in Dying."

"Aid in Dying" is a traditional euphemism for assisted suicide and euthanasia. The first paragraph of the proposed statement is set forth below, followed by my responding submission.

Wednesday, December 19, 2018

US Euthanasia Bill All But Dead - For Now

Margaret Dore &
Dawn Eskew
This year, the US Congress considered the "Palliative Care and Hospice Education and Training Act," bills H.R. 1676 and S. 693. The Act seeks to provide financial support for palliative care and hospice education centers, including direct patient care.

The Act was viewed as noncontroversial. Indeed, H.R. 1676 passed the House on a voice vote without opposition.

There is, however, a catch.

This is because US euthanasia advocates are currently promoting "medical aid in dying" (euthanasia) as "palliative care."[1] There is a similar situation in Canada, where "lobbies are trying to influence the government to include so-called Medical Aid in Dying ... in palliative care."[2]

The significance is this: If the Act is passed into law and the above advocacy efforts are successful, medical aid in dying (euthanasia) will become part of palliative care and therefore part of the Act. More to the point, the Act will legalize and also finance euthanasia in government funded centers throughout the US. The Act is a closet or "springing" euthanasia bill.

Thursday, May 3, 2018

Margaret Dore Testifies


Margaret Dore, testifying against Bill A.2383-A, seeking to legalize assisted suicide and euthanasia in New York State. For more information, see Dore's bill analysis, at these links:  memo and appendix

Friday, February 9, 2018

"Prescribe or Refer" Is Anti-Patient: Doctors Are Not Allowed to Use Their Best Judgment for Individual Patients (No More Jeanette Halls)

Margaret Dore, Esq., MBA
By Margaret Dore Esq., MBA - updated 05/12/18

A Wisconsin bill seeking to legalize assisted suicide, requires the patient's attending physician to "prescribe or refer" i.e., to write a lethal prescription for the purpose of killing the patient, 
or to make an effective referral to another physician, who will do it.

The bill, AB 216, also says that the attending physician's failure to comply is "unprofessional conduct" such that the physician would be subject to discipline. The bill states:
[F]ailure of an attending physician to fulfill a request for medication [the lethal dose] constitutes unprofessional conduct if the attending physician refuses or fails to make a good faith attempt to transfer the requester's care and treatment to another physician who will act as attending physician under this chapter and fulfill the request for medication. (Emphasis added).*
A significance of prescribe or refer is that it's anti-patient, by not allowing doctors to use their best judgment for individual patients.


Wednesday, November 1, 2017

Victoria: Elder Abuse Demands No Vote

Margaret Dore
Margaret Dore, an experienced attorney specialising in elder law in Washington State, where assisted suicide is legal, has urged Victorian MPs “to reject the proposed bill seeking to legalize assisted suicide and euthanasia.”

Her analysis of the purported "Voluntary Assisted Dying Bill 2017," which would legalise euthanasia as well as assisted suicide, can be read in full here.


Dore points out that in “Oregon and Washington State, most people who die under their [assisted suicide] laws are elders, aged 65 or older. This demographic is already an especially at risk group for abuse and financial exploitation. This is true in both the US and Australia.

Thursday, October 13, 2016

Montana: Say "No" to the Oregon Experience

By Margaret Dore, Esq., MBA

To view pdf version with footnotes, click here.

Since the passage of Oregon’s law allowing physician-assisted suicide, other suicides in Oregon have steadily increased. This is consistent with a suicide contagion in which the legalization of physician-assisted suicides has encouraged other suicides. In Oregon, the financial and emotional impacts of suicide on family members and the broader community are devastating
and long-lasting.

Friday, August 12, 2016

'Death with Dignity' Imperils the Poor

Reprint from 2004

http://realchangenews.org/index.php/site/archives/9122

Last week’s article by an assisted suicide/euthanasia advocate struck me as a bizarre article  
for Real Change, which advocates for the dignity and self-determination of the poor. (“Terminally ill patients face shortage of right-to-die drug amid controversy over capital punishment,” Real Change, June 18, 2014)

Thursday, June 30, 2016

Massachusetts Assisted Suicide Bill Dies in Committee!

From Second Thoughts, Massachusetts, People with Disabilities Opposing the Legalization of Assisted Suicide:

Today, the Joint Committee on Public Health, of the Massachusetts Legislature, "declined to advance H.1999 the latest assisted suicide bill, H 1991, euphemistically titled 'An act affirming a terminally ill patient's right to compassionate aid in dying.' Disability rights advocates, along with representatives from medicine and members of the public, testified and lobbied against the bill."

The written testimony of Margaret Dore, president of Choice is an Illusion, is summarized below:
H.1991 is similar to Ballot Question 2, which was defeated by a vote of the people in 2012. This memo and its attachments discuss why H.1991 is a recipe for elder abuse. Passage will also cause family trauma, and encourage people with years to live to throw away their lives....  Even if you are for the concept of assisted suicide, H.1991 is the wrong bill.
Thank you to everyone who helped make this defeat possible!

Please consider a generous donation to Second ThoughtsChoice is an Illusion or your local group fighting against the legalization of assisted suicide and euthanasia.

We are need your support!

Choice is an Illusion

Sunday, May 22, 2016

South Africa: Dore Expert Witness Affidavit

Below, an excerpt from the expert witness affidavit of Attorney Margaret K. Dore, filed in the Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa, SCA Case No: 531/2015. 

The affidavit, including attachments, can be viewed by clicking here.

The Oregon and Washington Acts

12.  The Oregon and Washington "Death with Dignity Acts" legalize physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia as those terms are traditionally defined. See memo, pp. 2-3 (regarding definitions)  at "MD."

Friday, May 20, 2016

Media Release: Carter has been proved wrong; new law needed to prohibit assisted suicide & euthanasia

FRIDAY, MAY 20, 2016

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Canada’s Bill C-14, which seeks to codify assisted suicide and euthanasia, is a recipe for elder abuse. Recommendations by the Senate Legal & Constitutional Affairs Committee do not solve the bill’s problems. The bill violates the Canadian Supreme Court case, Carter v Canada.  

Recent news stories have proven Carter wrong. This justifies a new look at the issue, including time for more study or a new law prohibiting euthanasia and assisted suicide. 

Thursday, April 14, 2016

Margaret Dore Speaking to Australian Delegation

Margaret Dore, Esq., MBA, speaking
 to the Delegation
On April 7, 2016, Margaret Dore, attorney and president of Choice is an Illusion, accompanied by her assistant, Brenda Ray, met with a five member delegation from the Legal and Social Issues Committee, Parliament of Victoria, Australia.

The topic was assisted suicide and euthanasia. The place was the Picnic House Restaurant in Portland Oregon where Dore spoke over lunch in opposition to legalization. Despite the serious nature of the topic, a good time was had by all.

Dore's written materials can be viewed by clicking here and here.

Tuesday, March 22, 2016

Rhode Island: Press Release

https://choiceisanillusion.files.wordpress.com/2016/03/press-release-03-22-161.pdf

Dore:   The bill is sold as assuring patient choice and control.  The bill is instead stacked against the patient and a recipe for elder abuse.” 

Contact: Margaret Dore

(206) 697-1217

Providence, RI
– Attorney Margaret Dore, president of Choice is an Illusion, which has fought assisted suicide/euthanasia legalization efforts in many states and now Rhode Island, made the following statement in connection with tomorrow's legislative hearing on a bill seeking to legalize assisted suicide and euthanasia in that state.  (H 7659, hearing Wednesday, 3/23/16, Rise of the House).

"There is a bill pending before the Rhode Island House of Representatives, which seeks to legalize physician-assisted suicide, assisted suicide and euthanasia as those terms are traditionally defined," said Dore.  "The bill describes these practices as 'hastening death,' but there is no requirement that a person be near death.  Indeed, ‘eligible’ persons may have years, even decades, to live.”

Dore said, "The bill is sold as assuring patient choice and control.  The bill is instead stacked against the patient and a recipe for elder abuse.”  Dore elaborated, “The patient's heir, who will financially benefit from the patient's death, is allowed to actively participate in signing the patient up for the lethal dose.  After that, no doctor, not even a witness, is required to be present at the death.  Even if the patient struggled, who would know?”  Dore concluded, “The bill creates the perfect crime.”

Sunday, March 6, 2016

Assisted Suicide Proponents Wilt After Tough Questioning by Committee


From Stop Assisted Suicide Maryland
Margaret Dore, Esq.
Posted on February 26, 2016

(Annopolis MD) Proponents of physician-assisted suicide struggled to answer the tough questions thrown at them at yesterday’s Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee hearing on SB 418. The Committee met late into the night with Senators raising significant concerns with the bill and its lack of protections.
The message from proponents, led by national group Compassion & Choices, was that any protections in the law would stall a patient’s ability to get a lethal prescription from their physician. And questions surrounding these increased protections continuously baffled witnesses. There is nothing in this bill that would require a mental health screening, or ensure a physician is present at the time the lethal dose is taken. Proponents’ response to these concerns is that the Maryland healthcare system can’t support these types of mandates.  This is a weak excuse when it comes to protecting our most vulnerable populations who will be at risk if this bill is passed.
In fact, across the board proponents neglect to mention the issues in this legislation that would put our most vulnerable populations at risk. One witness in support of the bill, even referred to the disabled community’s concerns surrounding abuse and coercion of the vulnerable as irresponsible. ... This is a community that has consistently faced discrimination in healthcare laws. To not consider the threat to this community is irresponsible.
Powerful testimony was presented by an elder law attorney [Margaret Dore] who raised the significant potential for elder abuse surrounding this legislation.* She stated that in her experience, it is very common that family members are coercing elderly relatives for financial reasons. In confusing answers, proponents pushed back against protections that would disqualify witnesses who would benefit financially from a death, using the unacceptable excuse that it would leave family out of this process.
The Senate Committee brought some important questions to the table and it was clear that proponents were not prepared to answer. Maybe it’s because they know the physician assisted suicide bill in Maryland is indefensible.   

* To view Ms. Dore's written testimony, please see memo hereclick here for the appendix.