Oregon Death With Dignity Political Action Fund

"Where Do I Sign?"

Oregon Death With Dignity Political Action Fund — Mon, 21 Nov 2011 09:22:06 -0800

Randee is a volunteer with Dignity 2012, and recently helped to collect signatures for the Massachusetts Death with Dignity effort. She's one of the founders of Hampshire County Hospice, served on their first Board of Directors, and was their first Volunteer Coordinator. She's also a member of the Funeral Consumers Alliance of Western Massachusetts, served as a Trustee, and was President of Western Massachusetts Hemlock Society for many years. She's provided support and education around death and dying issues to her community for over 30 years. She lives and works in western Massachusetts.

I recently had the honor to collect signatures here in Massachusetts for the initiative petition on Death With Dignity. I say it was an honor because this petition, if it makes it to the ballot box in November 2012, will afford those who choose to end their lives with dignity and respect the opportunity to do so.

As I stood out on the streets and approached folks I was fearful of the reactions I might encounter. Would people shake their heads "no" and walk away or curse me out? I do live in a five-college community but still one never knows. I know I don't like being accosted by people with clipboards myself; so, I was very careful to be polite and respectful.

The good news is no one said "no," walked away, or ignored me. Most people asked "where do I sign?" after they understood what the petition was about. No one wanted any further explanation.

In Greenfield, I asked a woman if she'd be interested in signing and she shook her head "yes" as I handed her the clipboard. She took her time and as she was writing a tear trickled down her cheek and more came. All the while she didn't speak. Finally she was finished and handed the clipboard back to me. I asked if she was OK and she said her dad had died recently and it was a horrific experience of suffering and incalculable pain. She said if Death with Dignity was in effect, his death would have been so very different. She thanked me for collecting signatures and walked away.

Another day, I was running into a local restaurant to get lunch to-go. As I waited in line, my former doctor walked in and we chatted while waiting for our orders. She asked what I was up to and I told her about the petition. She said "where do I sign?" I had them in my car; so, we dashed to my car in the pouring rain and she signed leaning halfway into the back seat. She said, "thanks for doing this, it's important."

We don't think about the stress on doctors who struggle with what to do when a patient wants to end his or her life. My best friend was dying from ovarian cancer last year. She had a very sharp sense of humor and when the doctor told her the prognosis she asked "can I have a physician aide in dying with dignity? The doctor said legally she was unable to help and my friend asked, "how about flying me to Seattle?"

I had a letter to the editor published in our local newspaper recently. A few nights later, I received a call from an elderly gentleman. He said he read my letter and wanted to sign the petition. We agreed to meet at a Dunkin Donuts in Northampton. He was going to be wearing a hooded sweatshirt. I arrived at the appointed time and spotted him at a table in the back. We sat and talked, he signed and asked if I had blank forms, because he too wanted to collect signatures. He then told me of caring for his older brother.

They grew up together and were always close. When his brother was diagnosed with esophageal cancer he cared for him and tended him through his death. He spoke with a heavy heart and then asked me if I minded if a friend of his could join us. Soon another older gent arrived. This was a rough and tumble outdoors-man, kind of on the gruff and grizzled side. He also spoke with great passion about his experience with a dying friend and why this petition was so important to him. We sat and talked for an hour and again they thanked me.

This experience has been a humbling one as I encounter random strangers and learn their stories. It is truly an honor to do this work.

2011 Annual Report

Peg Sandeen, MSW — Thu, 03 Nov 2011 14:31:59 -0800

I'm pleased to present our 2011 Annual Report detailing the organizational activities undertaken by the Death with Dignity National Center during fiscal year 2010-2011. Our nation is facing difficult times, and economic issues are at the forefront of all policy discussions. And, yet, donors to the National Center have been exceedingly generous this past year. Your support has made it possible for us to continue our work improving end-of-life options for terminally ill individuals.

Relationships. Partnerships. Networking. These are the keywords best describing our activities of the past year. Focused on grassroots organizing, staff and board members of the Death with Dignity National Center have forged important alliances with advocacy groups, interested individuals, and medical professionals throughout New England. The shift to New England from a focus on Washington and Oregon was necessitated by trends in the movement. Death with Dignity is no longer an issue viable only in a few states on the west coast. It's a policy experiencing broad public support around the country.

During the last fiscal year, we partnered closely with individuals from Vermont to provide public education and information to stakeholders and members of the general public. The Vermont Legislature is considering Death with Dignity legislation, and our organization has worked throughout the year to contribute non-political, educational presentations and materials to those who are participating in the important debate about expanded end-of-life care options in Vermont. We've raised and distributed funds to the grassroots organization Patient Choices Vermont to support their important work on this effort.

Additionally, we've provided grassroots organizing support to the people of Massachusetts in their pursuit of Death with Dignity. Three of our board members live in Boston, and we have a deep commitment to end-of-life care policy reform in the Commonwealth. Our organization provided the financial and legal resources necessary to author the Massachusetts Death with Dignity Act currently being considered for the 2012 Massachusetts ballot. We helped the Massachusetts-based organizers identify supporters and volunteers, and we'll continue to participate in the campaign throughout 2012. When compared with other social movements in the United States, Death with Dignity is a movement moving from infancy to childhood. We've experienced vital success at the US Supreme Court, and we've firmly established laws in Washington and Oregon. Broad public support in New England and on the East Coast suggests there will be many successes in the upcoming years.

All of this success would not be possible without you. I invite you to peruse our 2011 Annual Report, and please feel free to contact us if you have any questions about it.

Massachusetts joins Vermont in home-grown Death with Dignity efforts.

Peg Sandeen, MSW — Fri, 09 Sep 2011 23:55:09 -0800

A coalition of Massachusetts citizens has come together to place a Death with Dignity law—modeled after Oregon and Washington Death with Dignity legislation—on the Massachusetts ballot for 2012! Massachusetts now joins Vermont as one of two New England states initiating home-grown Death with Dignity efforts.

The Death with Dignity Political Action Fund, and its educational affiliate—the Death with Dignity National Center—are working at full capacity to support both states financially and with our political and legal expertise. We are very excited at the prospect of there being two new Death with Dignity laws enacted in 2012!

Efforts are moving at a rapid pace, and there are still many hurdles to overcome before the proposal reaches the ballot. Most of the steps are not public, but we want you to have an inside peek into the progress:

August 2nd: proposed law filed with the Massachusetts Attorney General's office.
September 7th: the Attorney General produced a summary for voters and certified the proposal to the ballot.
By the end of November Dignity 2012 will need to gather nearly 70,000 valid signatures (estimated cost $325,000).

Here's where we need your help. In order for their efforts to be successful, they need to educate the citizens of Massachusetts about the law and gather over 800 signatures per day. The more people understand how the law works—its safeguards, and the Oregon story—the more likely they are to sign a petition to add the question to the 2012 ballot and support its passage.

We have no doubt that Dignity 2012 will succeed in their endeavor. The people of Massachusetts already overwhelmingly support Death with Dignity policy. On the day the proposal was filed, a Quincy, MA, newspaper hosted an online, non-scientific poll, and over 70% of of the 643 respondents indicated they would vote for this initiative!

Prominent medical professionals are also stepping forward to lend their vocal support. As quoted in the Boston Herald, former Editor-in-Chief of the New England Journal of Medicine and one of the original petitioners of the proposal, Marcia Angell, stated:

The Massachusetts Death with Dignity Act would create a legally sanctioned process for dying patients whose suffering cannot be adequately controlled to receive a prescription from a licensed physician to bring about a peaceful and dignified death. As a physician who has studied this issue over many years, I believe the people of Massachusetts are ready to consider giving suffering patients this option.

The Death with Dignity Political Action Fund is ready too! As a partner in these efforts, we're providing support to these grassroots activities. We hope you'll help us as we lend our expertise to their efforts to bring Death with Dignity to Massachusetts and Vermont.

The time is now for New England to have safe, state-monitored physician-hastened dying for terminally ill adult residents. Please join us as we lend our full support to these critical efforts with a gift to the Death with Dignity Political Action Fund today.

Vermont Death with Dignity Update

Oregon Death With Dignity Political Action Fund — Fri, 12 Aug 2011 06:00:00 -0800

A special report from Amy Shollenberger, Grassroots Organizer for Patient Choices Vermont, about the recent accomplishments and current status of the Vermont's Death with Dignity legislative effort:

Patient Choices Vermont has been working hard toward the first ever legislatively passed Death with Dignity Act.

This past winter, the bill was introduced into both sides of the Vermont Statehouse (H.274 in the House and S.103 in the Senate) with a large number of sponsors, including prominent members of all three major political parties— Democrat, Republican, and Progressive — and it's well positioned for passage during the 2012 legislative session.

Our recently elected Governor, Peter Shumlin, is a strong supporter of the bill. Governor Shumlin was very open in his support for the bill during the election, and before legislators adjourned for the year, Shumlin publicly reiterated his support:

I'm a big supporter of Death with Dignity...The Oregon bill is the model we used for our bill…I would like to see it passed in Vermont...next year. I'd very much like to be the governor who signs it into law.

Leading up to that statement, Patient Choices Vermont led a strong grassroots effort to build support for the bill in the statehouse. Our activities included a press conference for the bill's introduction, new poll results showing Vermonters overwhelmingly support the Death with Dignity bill, and several other important events:

March: Patient Choices hosted a speaker tour over the mid-session break with George Eighmey from Oregon. The tour featured four public events, as well as several press interviews, including a popular call-in radio show, cable access TV interviews, a feature in a local alternative paper, and coverage of our public forums.
April: Patient Choices Vermont worked with HBO when they came to Vermont with filmmaker Peter Richardson to screen a "sneak preview" of How to Die in Oregon.
May: Death with Dignity National Center board president, Steve Telfer, visited Vermont and joined our team in the statehouse for an afternoon.

Throughout the session, Patient Choices Vermont's field efforts generated hundreds of phone calls to legislators, dozens of letters to the editor, and several activist meetings with lawmakers. As a result, we ended the 2011 session with strong support for the Death with Dignity bill, and an expectation that the bill will be considered in 2012. Check out many of the Letters to the Editor, Editorials, and Opinion Editorials.

Notably, the bill has also garnered conservative newspaper editorial support. Emerson Lynn from the St. Albans Messenger wrote:

It's their life. It should be their choice. We should not countenance arguments that suggest terminally ill patients should endure suffering, and that they have no voice in how their lives should end.
Remember, too, this is not a decision forced upon the terminally ill. Those affected would have the freedom to choose their course. Why then, should we allow people not affected to control the most personal of all decisions for those who are?

We shouldn't. The Death with Dignity bill deserves our support.

Polling in Vermont continually demonstrates the strong public support for the bill. The traditional town meeting week poll run by the Dean of the State Senate, Bill Doyle, this year again found overwhelming support for the bill.

This summer and fall, Patient Choices Vermont will continue to lead an effort to work toward enactment of the bill in 2012. We're working with our supporters across the state to urge lawmakers to support the bill. We'll also hold more public forums this fall, and continue our media relations efforts. Our legislative session begins in January, and we'll be ready for it!

You can keep up to date with our grassroots efforts through the Patient Choices Vermont website, on Facebook, or through our Twitter updates.

The Facts about Death with Dignity

Melissa Barber — Wed, 10 Aug 2011 06:00:00 -0800

Today, I was looking at a copy of the Washington Death with Dignity Act to check out a specific piece of information, and I realized the law is 20 pages long. Because I work with it everyday, I'm familiar with the law's intricacies, but seeing it laid out page after page, I realized many individuals who are looking at it for the first time may be overwhelmed. I thought I'd provide a bit of a recap for our followers.

Oregon and Washington are currently the only two states with Death with Dignity Acts. The laws are similar in both states, allowing terminally ill adult residents who are mentally competent to request a prescription from a physician for a medication to hasten death. These patients must also be able to self-administer the medication. The process is voluntary for everyone involved — patient, physician, pharmacist, health care facility.

Who's eligible to use the Oregon or Washington laws?

Eligibility:
To use the Oregon or Washington law, patients must be 18 years old or older, residents of Oregon or Washington diagnosed with a terminal illness with six months or less to live. The patients must be free of any mental health condition, such as depression, which impairs their ability to make health care decisions. Two physicians must examine the patient and confirm the diagnosis and prognosis. Both physicians must determine the patient is capable of making and communicating health care decisions.
Can a non-Oregonian or non-Washingtonian use the law?
No. Only patients who establish Oregon or Washington residency can use the law if they meet the states' residency requirements (state drivers license, documentation proving the patient rents or owns Oregon or Washington property, state voter registration, or a recent state tax return).

How do Death with Dignity laws protect all citizens?
Several safeguards in Death with Dignity laws ensure all citizens of the state are protected. Any eligible patient must be able to self-administer the medication and may stop the process at any time. The multiple safeguards and the request process ensure there's no chance patients are coerced to hasten their deaths. The terminally-ill patient:

verbally requests the medication from the physician twice; each request is separated by 15 days.
makes a written request to the attending physician; the request is witnessed by two individuals, one of whom isn't a primary care giver or family member.
can rescind the verbal and written requests at any time.
must be able to self-administer the prescribed medication.

The law further requires...

The attending physician must be licensed in the same state as the patient.
The physician's diagnosis must include a terminal illness, with six months or fewer to live.
The diagnosis must be certified by a consulting physician, who must also confirm the patient is mentally competent to make and communicate health care decisions.
If either physician determines the patient's judgment is impaired, the patient must be referred for a psychological examination.
The attending physician must inform the patient of alternatives, including palliative care, hospice and pain management options.
The attending physician must request that the patient notify their next-of-kin of the prescription request.
Use of the law cannot affect the status of a patient's health or life insurance policies.

The Oregon Department of Human Services and Washington State Department of Health enforce compliance with the law. Compliance requires physicians to report all prescriptions to the state, and annually, the states publish information about their residents' usage of their Death with Dignity Acts.

Assisted suicide, active euthanasia, and mercy killing are all banned practices under these laws. Here are some definitions of these terms to help distinguish between the lawfully, codified practice known as Death with Dignity.

Assisted Suicide is a term used by opponents to scare people, and assisting a suicide is a banned practice under the law. Assisted suicide more accurately refers to criminals like this guy.

Involuntary Euthanasia/Mercy Killing occurs when a patient's death is hastened without the patient's consent. Mercy killing is most frequently associated with military settings.

Active Euthanasia is generally understood as the deliberate action of a medial professional or layperson to hasten a patient's death, and may be in the form of a lethal injection.

Suicide is also inaccurate. A terminally ill patient making a request under the Oregon or Washington law is doing so to hasten an already inevitable and imminent death; therefore, the act cannot properly be equated with suicide. None of the moral, existential, or religious connotations of suicide apply when the patient's primary objective is not to end an otherwise open-ended span of life but to find dignity in an already impending exit from this world. Individuals who use the law may be offended by the use of "assisted suicide," because they're participating in an act to shorten the agony of their final hours, not killing themselves. Cancer (or another underlying condition) is killing them.

The Death with Dignity National Center and the Death with Dignity Political Action Fund work to promote and educate people about the importance of Death with Dignity Acts throughout the US. These laws provide guidelines for a rarely-used end-of-life option for the terminally ill. They lend peace of mind to countless individuals diagnosed with a terminal illness facing perhaps the most difficult decision of their lives.

Please consider making a non tax-deductible, political donation to the Death with Dignity Political Action Fund to help make Death with Dignity a reality in more states.

Laws Should Reflect Diversity of Opinions

Oregon Death With Dignity Political Action Fund — Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:36:33 -0800

You needn't agree with physician-assisted death to support Death with Dignity laws. Most people wouldn't and don't choose this end-of-life option but still advocate for others to be able to make this decision for themselves. If everyone who supported Death with Dignity laws were also adamant they would exercise this option when the time came, we'd expect a large percentage of Oregonians to have hastened their deaths sometime in the last 13 years.

In reality, the opposite is true: In 1997, 60% of Oregon voters decided to uphold their groundbreaking legislation, and the number of deaths reported under Oregon's law accounts for only 0.2% of all Oregon's deaths. It's an option which is seldom used but lends profound peace of mind to thousands of Oregonians who know they'll be able to control when or whether to take the life ending medication if they ever face a terminal illness.

Like Rabbi Anson Laytner (pictured above) who was recently interviewed on Interfaith Voices about his thoughts and personal experience with Washington's Death with Dignity law, many people come to support this additional end-of-life option when their understanding moves "from being an abstract principal to being a human situation." Rabbi Laytner's clear position to not endorse the option shifted during his work as an executive director of an AIDS organization where he saw many people struggle with end of life issues, and more recently his support for the option solidified through his wife's experience with terminal ovarian cancer:

I see Death with Dignity as a way of affirming life because a person who chooses that option has lived life, they know they are dying, medical treatment has in a sense prolonged their life — which is a very good thing — but at a certain point one recognizes there are no more options and that you choose life means you say your goodbyes in a very conscious way and then close the door.

Even before his personal experiences with death led him to unequivocally support the Washington and Oregon Death with Dignity Acts, Rabbi Laytner, acknowledged he could understand why a person might want the option. Similarly, the California-Pacific chapter of the Methodist Federation for Social Action recently voted to "support existing and newly organized efforts to educate its members and the community at large about the death with dignity movement."

Their resolution is strikingly different from the US Conference of Catholic Bishops' vote which occurred on the same day. The bishops' vote highlighted church doctrine, "As disciples of one who is Lord of the living, we need to be messengers of the Gospel of Life."

Rather than encouraging people to seek more information and understand what Death with Dignity Acts allow like the California-Pacific chapter of United Methodists, the Catholic bishops voted to stifle public debate and encourage people to follow church dogma without question or discussion. While the Death with Dignity National Center supports churches taking a stance on moral issues, we continue to be confused why any church believes it speaks for a nation which was founded on the principal of separation of church and state.

The US is a country built by individuals from all different backgrounds. Likewise, our laws should reflect our diversity, encourage discussion, and allow all citizens to live the way they know is best for them. If or when you face a terminal illness, you might not wish to hasten your death, but who are you to decide this for anyone else?

An Insider’s Look at Legislation in 2011

Peg Sandeen, MSW — Thu, 28 Apr 2011 06:00:00 -0800

Legislators from around the country grappled with Death with Dignity and other issues related to end-of-life care during the 2011 legislative sessions.

In Vermont, a coalition made up of local families, activists, advocates, and lobbyists has made tremendous progress toward enacting a Death with Dignity law. House Bill 274 was introduced with 44 sponsors and Senate Bill 103 followed with 11 sponsors—representing more than a third of the Senate. Both have the support of the governor, who called on the legislative leaders to bring the bill to his desk for signature.

A bill to mandate counseling for all terminally ill individuals going through the process of qualification for the Oregon Death with Dignity Act was introduced in the Oregon legislature in March, 2011. Tireless lobbying work by political strategists from the Oregon Death with Dignity Political Action Fund, killed the bill before it gained any momentum.

Maryland joined the growing list of states to offer a POLST (Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment) program, or in their case "MOLST" (Medical Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment). This standardized form will help ensure patients' end-of-life wishes are honored.

Get more information about these and check out other states' end-of-life legislative efforts.

Vermont Physicians Support Death with Dignity Bill

Oregon Death With Dignity Political Action Fund — Tue, 05 Apr 2011 12:30:59 -0800

Vermont state Representative George Till, a physician and member of the House Committee on Health Care, released the 2011 Vermont Physician Legislative Survey results. This independent survey was conducted with the help of a grant from the University of Vermont College of Medicine. The questions covered the main health care topics under consideration by the Vermont Legislature this session: Death with Dignity, a single payer heath care system, consumption taxes and how best to entice more primary care physicians to under-served communities.

We encourage you to check out the results on your own. The answers about Vermont's Death with Dignity bills are especially compelling:

Among primary care physicians, 61.5% favor passage of the proposed Death with Dignity legislation.

70.2% of all Vermont physicians support or have a neutral stance on Vermont's Death with Dignity Act.
Nearly 90% believe the proposed law is safe and protects patients and physicians.
Of the primary care doctors who regularly work with dying patients, 34.1% would likely participate in the law.

We've found physicians are often reserved when it comes to vocally supporting proposed Death with Dignity Acts, and that's what makes the results of this survey so exciting. This survey demonstrates Vermont physicians are aligned with all Vermonters in their support of the legislative bills.

A Zogby poll from February this year found 64% of Vermonters support the legislation and 85% agree (68% of those strongly agree) with the statement, "I should be able to make my own choices about what happens to me at the end of my life without the government, doctors, or the church telling me what to do."

We invite you to learn more about and read the text of Vermont's Death with Dignity legislation. And please consider making a non tax-deductible, political donation to the Death with Dignity Political Action Fund to help make Death with Dignity in Vermont a reality in 2011! 100% of your contribution will go directly to the Vermont effort.

Death with Dignity Bill Introduced in Vermont Senate

Peg Sandeen, MSW — Tue, 29 Mar 2011 14:33:50 -0800

We join Patient Choices Vermont in applauding Senators Jeanette White and Diane Snelling for introducing Death with Dignity legislation to the Vermont Senate for consideration during the 2011 session! Senators White and Snelling have been joined by nine of their colleagues as cosponsors—representing more than a third of the Senate.

Vermont's proposed legislation emulates the groundbreaking and time-tested Oregon and Washington Death with Dignity Acts and would be the third of its kind in the US. Well-crafted Death with Dignity laws have been demonstrated to work the way they're intended. They're backed by 13 years of data and independent studies which show no evidence of a slippery slope for vulnerable populations.

Many Vermonters and their lawmakers already know and understand the peace of mind expanded end-of-life options like Death with Dignity can give to a person dying of a terminal illness and family members. As Emerson Lynn, the editor and publisher of the St. Albans Messenger, eloquently stated in an editorial posted on Vermont Tiger:

It should also be understood that the patient's request is not an act of weakness, but an act of strength. We may not understand death, but we understand life, and we have our own distinct opinions as to how we should live them, and what makes us happy and what does not. That includes its last moments. That includes how we choose to say goodbye. That includes how we want to be remembered. That includes all the little details that have made up our lives to the point just before death. That choice should be ours.

Requesting a prescription under Death with Dignity regulations is not a decision made lightly, and for many, simply having the medication is a great source of comfort in their final days. Typically, only two thirds of the small group of terminally ill patients who receive the prescription ingest the medication.

We invite you to learn more about and read the text of Vermont's Death with Dignity bill. And please consider making a non tax-deductible, political donation to the Death with Dignity Political Action Fund to help make Death with Dignity in Vermont a reality in 2011! 100% of your contribution will go directly to the Vermont effort.

"I'll mind my own business if you'll do the same."

Oregon Death With Dignity Political Action Fund — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 12:46:47 -0800

Bob Stannard posted an insightful opinion piece about Vermont's Death with Dignity bill (H.274) titled "Isn't this supposed to be a free country?" on VTDigger.com. Much like Emerson Lynn's editorial from last week, Stannard calls for Vermonters to stay true to their independent spirit and let all citizens make their own decisions for end-of-life care when faced with a terminal illness:

In my eyes you are free to choose to do whatever it is you want to do, as long as you do not impose upon me. I'm a Vermonter and that's pretty much how Vermonters think. Generally speaking they could care less what you do, or who you do it with, as long as you mind your own business.

Much of the opposition to the proposed bill has been from fundamentalist religious groups. The majority of people attending the town hall-style meeting Stannard refers to in his post were from a single church congregation. They were mobilized by their church leaders and armed with specific questions to ask the speakers as well as matching yellow stickers with a general opposition statement (the same stickers were visible in Montana's recent legislative hearings).

Stannard artfully explains why a vocal religious minority shouldn't dictate the range of end-of-life options afforded to all individuals:

However, things get sticky when others want to impose their religious and/or moral beliefs on others...They don't want someone else to have the freedom to control the final, painful moments of his or her life, because their religious beliefs dictate that they are supposed to suffer.
What you choose to believe is your business. What I choose to believe is my business. Let's make a deal. I'll mind my own business if you'll do the same. I won't hurt you. You promise not to hurt me. Then, and only then, can we say that we live in freedom.

Read the complete post on VTDigger.com.

Please consider making a non tax-deductible, political donation to the Death with Dignity Political Action Fund today! 100% of your contribution will go directly to the Vermont effort.