Showing posts with label assisted suicide. Show all posts
Showing posts with label assisted suicide. Show all posts

Thursday, February 15, 2024

Nine States Have Strengthened Their Laws Against Assisted Suicide

Alabama Governor
Kay Ivey
By Margaret Dore, Esq., MBA

In the last thirteen years, at least nine states have strengthened their laws against assisted suicide and/or euthanasia. They are:

1.  Alabama:  In 2017, Alabama enacted the Assisted Suicide Ban Act;
2.  Arizona:  In 2014, Arizona strengthened its law against assisted suicide.
3.  Georgia:  In 2012, Georgia strengthened its law against assisted suicide.
4.  Idaho:  On April 5, 2011, Idaho strengthened its law against assisted suicide.
5.  Indiana:  On January 29, 2024, the Indiana House and Senate supported a joint resolution opposing  and condemning assisted medical suicide.

Wednesday, February 14, 2024

Indiana House Resolution Opposing Assisted Suicide; Senate Concurring

To view the entire document, click here.

Be it resolved by the House of Representatives of the General Assembly of the State of Indiana, the Senate concurring: 

SECTION 1. That the Indiana General Assembly strongly opposes and condemns assisted medical suicide because the Indiana General Assembly has an unqualified interest in the preservation of human life. 

SECTION 2. That the Indiana General Assembly strongly opposes and condemns assisted medical suicide because anything less than a prohibition leads to foreseeable abuses and eventually to euthanasia by devaluing human life, particularly the lives of the terminally ill, elderly, disabled, and depressed whose lives are of no less value or quality than any other citizen of this state. 

Thursday, December 28, 2023

Anita Cameron: "My Mum Didn't Die"*

Good morning. I’m Anita Cameron, Director of Minority Outreach for Not Dead Yet, a national, grassroots disability organization opposed to medical discrimination, healthcare rationing, euthanasia and assisted suicide.

Assisted suicide laws are dangerous because though these laws are supposed to be for people with six months or less to live, doctors are often wrong about a terminal diagnosis. In 2009, while living in Washington state, my mother was determined to be at the end stage of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. I was told her death was imminent, that if I wanted to see her alive, I should get there in two days. She rallied, but was still quite ill, so she was placed in hospice. Her doctor said that her body had begun the process of dying.

Though she survived 6 months of hospice, her doctor convinced her that her body was still in the process of dying, and she moved home to Colorado to die.

My mum didn’t die. In fact, six weeks after returning to Colorado, she and I were arrested together in Washington, DC, fighting for disability justice. She became active in her community and lived almost 12 years!

Friday, February 18, 2022

EPC - USA Files Brief to Massachusetts Supreme Court in the Kligler Assisted Suicide Case

Alex Schadenberg, Executive Directive, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

In January 2020 the assisted suicide lobby appealed a Massachusetts Superior court decision which found that there was no right to assisted suicide in Massachusetts. 

Recently the Massachusetts Supreme Court agreed to hear the case and yesterday, EPC-USA submitted a brief in the Massachusetts Supreme Court in this case. 

The case known as Kligler concerns Dr Roger Kligler, who is living with prostate cancer and seeking death by assisted suicide and Dr Alan Schoenberg, who is willing to prescribe lethal drugs for Kligler to die by assisted suicide.  Kligler who claimed to be terminally ill when launching the case in 2016 remains alive today.

Kligler and Schoenberg are arguing that doctors cannot be prosecuted for prescribing lethal drugs for assisted suicide to a competent terminally ill person under the Massachusetts state constitution.

Sunday, February 13, 2022

Dore Press Release: "Delaware Bill Seeks to Legalize Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia"

Attorney Margaret Dore, President of Choice is an Illusion, which has fought against assisted suicide and euthanasia legalization throughout the United States, and internationally, has issued the following statement regarding House Bill 140, now pending in the Delaware General Assembly, seeking to legalize physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia, on both a voluntary and involuntary basis. The Act, deceptively titled End of Life Options, refers to these practices as medical aid in dying.

Aid in Dying has been a euphemism for physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia since at least 1992," said Dore. “Per the American Medical Association, ‘physician-assisted suicide’ occurs when a doctor facilitates a patient’s death by providing the means or information to enable a patient to perform the life-ending act. ‘Euthanasia’ is the administration of a lethal agent by another person.”

Saturday, February 12, 2022

Legal Memorandum: Delaware Euthanasia Bill Must Be Rejected

I. INTRODUCTION

The Act, HB 140, seeks to amend Title 16 of the Delaware Code, to thereby create Chapter 25B “Relating to End of Life Options.” If enacted, the Act will legalize physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia as those terms are traditionally defined. This will be on both a voluntary and involuntary basis. The Act terms these practices medical aid in dying.

Aid in dying has been a euphemism for physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia since at least 1992.[1] The proposed Act is based on similar acts in Oregon and Washington State. Oregon’s Death with Dignity Act went into effect in 1997. Washington’s nearly identical act went into effect in 2009.  

All three acts apply to persons with a six month or less life expectancy. Such persons may in fact have years or decades to live. A well known example is Jeanette Hall. In 2000, she made a settled decision to use Oregon’s act. Her doctor convinced her to be treated for cancer instead, such that she is alive today, twenty-two years later.

Monday, April 12, 2021

Washington State Expansion Bill Dead

By Barbara Lyons (pictured here)

The Washington State expansion of assisted suicide bill, HB 1141, is dead. It passed in the House by a 60-37 vote and cleared several Senate committees.  

Thanks to the dedicated, persistent work of a diverse coalition of people in the disability rights, medical, right-to-life and faith communities, the Senate adjourned last night without taking up the bill. It is dead for this session.  

Jersey Debates Euthanasia

Jersey is a British Crown dependency, near the coast of Normandy France.  

The law on assisted dying [euthanasia] in Jersey is being reviewed by a Citizen's Jury, and it is expected to start a conversation which could lead to a debate on the law in Jersey's States Assembly.

The panel is made up of 23 members who will hear evidence on both sides of the assisted dying debate before reaching a conclusion by the end of May 2021. 

Friday, February 26, 2021

Hearing Today: Tell the Connecticut Public Health Committee to Reject Assisted Suicide & Euthanasia

Dore with Elaine Kolb

"Don't render yourselves, and the people you care about, sitting ducks to heirs and other predators."

By Margaret Dore, Esq.

To read Dore's analysis opposing Raised Bill No. 6425, with supporting documentation, click here and here.

1.    The Bill

The proposed bill, "An Act Concerning Aid in Dying for the Terminally Ill," seeks to legalize “aid in dying,” which is a euphemism for active euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide.[1] 
2. Who May Be Most at at Risk?
Individuals with money, meaning the middle class and above. 

Saturday, February 20, 2021

Portugal's Euthanasia Law Goes For Constitutional Review


LISBON, Portugal (AP) — Portugal’s president on Thursday asked the country’s Constitutional Court to evaluate a recent law passed by parliament that allows euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide for terminally ill and gravely injured people.

Portuguese President Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa said in a statement the legislation appears “excessively imprecise,” potentially creating a situation of “legal uncertainty.” 

Lawmakers three weeks ago approved by a significant majority the final wording of the bill, following almost a year of discussions to detail administrative procedures and other aspects of the procedures. The bill then went to the head of state, who had to decide whether to approve the law, veto it or send it to the Constitutional Court for review. 

Rebelo de Sousa said the bill also raises a series of questions about the constitutionality of “such a complex and controversial issue.” 

Parliament can override a presidential veto by voting a second time for approval.  

Thursday, January 7, 2021

Montana: New Bill to Overturn Assisted Suicide

  

By Margaret Dore, Esq., MBA

Senator Carl Glimm will be introducing a new bill to overturn Montana's Baxter decision.  

The purpose will be to clarify once and for all that physician-assisted suicide is not legal in Montana. 

To learn more, view our Montana page at this link.

Tuesday, September 22, 2020

New Zealand End of Life Choice Act Will Allow Non-Voluntary Death

By Margaret Dore, Esq., MBA* 

Justice Mallon

On June 16, 2020, Justice Jillian Mallon issued a judgment describing the End of Life Choice Act as limited to voluntary euthanasia and/or physician-assisted suicide. (Judgment, page 1). 

The Acthowever, also allows non-voluntary death. One reason is that assisted dying (euthanasia and assisted suicide) is described as being performed by a "medical practitioner." 

In practice, medical practitioners are allowed to provide medical treatment on a non-voluntary basis. For a common example, consider automobile accidents. Medical practitioners are allowed to treat accident victims on a non-voluntary basis if circumstances are determined to warrant such action. If the patient is unconscious and unable to give consent, medical treatment determined necessary by medical practitioners is nonetheless allowed to go forward.

Saturday, August 8, 2020

Who We Are, What We Do, How We Do It

Who we are

Choice is an Illusion, is a non-profit human rights organization opposed to assisted suicide, physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia. Our mission is to defeat the spread of these practices, including more recent incidents of "slow" euthanasia, for example:
The purposeful placement of actively ill COVID patients with nursing home residents; the reduction of options for individuals, including children, to stay healthy, by blocking their access to exercise, social interaction and healthcare; and the destruction of the economy, putting further pressure on individuals and families.
What we do

We fight to stop the spread of assisted suicide and euthanasia, and to defeat it.

How we do it

We provide legal/policy analyses and testimony to legislatures, courts and the public regarding real life problems with assisted suicide and euthanasia. We do this through our websites, our publications and our direct advocacy. We collaborate with other groups and individuals.

Wednesday, June 24, 2020

Graham Morant Red Flag to Oppose Assisted Suicide Legalization

By Richard Egan.
To view pdf, click here.

In a unanimous decision by three judges of the Queensland Court of Appeal handed down in Brisbane on 19 June 2020 in the case of R v Morant [2020] QCA 135, Graham Morant’s appeal against his conviction for aiding the suicide of his wife was rejected on all four grounds of appeal and the sentence of 10 years imprisonment was upheld as fair.

Morant was convicted on two counts under s311 of the Queensland Criminal Code. The first was that he had counselled Ms Morant to kill herself and thereby induced her to do so. The second was that he had aided her in killing herself.

Tuesday, June 23, 2020

Australia: Graham Robert Morant Loses Assisted Suicide Appeal

By Lydia Lynch, Brisbane Times

A Queensland man sentenced to 10 years in prison for helping his wife to kill herself for a $1.4 million life insurance payout has lost his appeal.
The ruling comes after emails between euthanasia campaigner Philip Nitschke and the man's wife were discovered following his conviction.
Graham Robert Morant (pictured here) was aged 69 when he was convicted of persuading his wife to end her life in November 2014.

Tuesday, June 9, 2020

Minnesota Website Update

Minnesota State Capitol
The 2019-2020 Minnesota Legislative Session features three bills seeking to legalize assisted suicide and euthanasia, as those terms are traditionally defined. The bills are HF 2152SF 2286 and SF 2487. For more information, see bill histories herehere and here.
On September 11, 2019, there was an informational meeting in the House Committee on Health and Human Services regarding HF 2152. No other activity is indicated. Presumably, there will be similar bills next session.

For information about similar bills in prior years, go to Choice is an Illusion Minnesota.

Wednesday, June 3, 2020

Massachusetts Euthanasia Bills Have Reportedly Moved Out of Committee

State House
According to unconfirmed sources, the Massachusetts "End of Life Options Act," seeking to legalize assisted suicide and euthanasia, has advanced out of the Joint Committee on Public Health to the Healthcare Finance Committee (S. 1208/H. 1926).

To learn more about problems with the Act, please see the legal/policy analysis below. If you have further information as to the exact status of the bills, please write me at margaretdore@nmargaretdore.com Thank you.

Margaret Dore, Esq.


Thursday, April 30, 2020

Assisted Suicide Bill HB 5420 Dead for Now

Stephen Mendelsohn
Stephen Mendelsohn:
We still need to be concerned about a special session, but for now, 8 years with no bill passing a single committee.
Story below courtesy of Connecticut News Junkie:

HARTFORD, CT — They never expected it to end like this, but legislative leaders decided Monday that it’s not safe for them to return to the state Capitol before the constitutional adjournment of May 6.

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.