Posted on 04/12/2005 9:42:29 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) - A legislative committee Tuesday approved a measure modeled after an Oregon law that would allow the terminally ill to end their lives with a doctor's assistance.
The bill cleared the Assembly Judiciary Committee after more than a dozen hours of testimony and debate spread over three hearings. It now moves to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, and finally to the floor. The Senate would then have to take up the legislation.
Supporters said the measure would give people with no more than six months to live the choice to end their lives with a self-administered drug prescribed by a physician.
Democratic Assemblywoman Patty Berg said the bill was "about autonomy."
"It's about providing a safe venue for patients to have a conversation with their doctors, a conversation that a huge majority of Californians say they would like to be able to have if they are ever put in a position to do so," she said.
A Field Poll conducted in February found 70 percent of those questioned said people who are terminally ill should be able to get life-ending drugs.
Opponents said the bill could lead to the killing of patients who weren't terminal or didn't want to die.
"Physician-assisted suicide is the wrong answer to the right question," said Dr. Robert Miller, former president of the Association of Northern California Oncologists. "The focus should be on doing everything we can to improve care at the end of life."
Diagnoses of terminal illness can be inaccurate, he added.
Former Oregon Gov. Barbara Roberts testified for the bill, saying Oregon's assisted-suicide law - the only one of its kind in the nation - has been used sparingly and properly and has led to better care for people facing death.
"The law has broad and deep political and public support in our state," she said.
the slippery slope....
About 120 years ago a medical editor succinctly distinguished between "mercy killing" and letting a patient go when his time came:
"Surrenduring to superior forces is not the same as leading the enemy in an attack on one's own friends."
Yeah, a slippery slope..however, it doesn't address the issue that we don't now give people ENOUGH pain meds cause of the idiotic War on Drugs attitude that ties doctors hands with fears of criminal charges in case the person has a cardiac arrest or other problems because of the morphine, etc.
Get the docs OFF THE HOOK in administering pain meds and other meds, like medical marijuana and this would not be such a big issue. we still have the problem that has not been addressed: if you start doing all these heroic measures technologically you can't down the line say " oh, we want a natural death..don't interfere with that."
There's a lot of hysteria on this subject and not much rational,logical problem solving.
Most people are not afraid of dying. It is agony and pain they are afraid of.
The DemocRATS! The Party of Death!
"Supporters said the measure would give people with no more than six months to live the choice to end their lives with a self-administered drug prescribed by a physician.
Opponents said the bill could lead to the killing of patients who weren't terminal or didn't want to die. "
====
I personally don't see anything wrong with this, PROVIDED THERE ARE STRONG SAFEGUARDS, such as written and signed statement from the patient, and detailed specific "living will" specifying the wishes of the patient, and have it specifically in the bill, that NO hearsay evidence can be used to decide that a person should be "suicided by doctor".
If a person with terminal cancer, with 3 months to live in agony, wants to decide to end his/her OWN suffering, I think they should be allowed to do it in the most painless way possible. BUT there must be strong safeguards, so guardians or relatives can't dispatch a person out of convenience.
I think the Terri Schiavo tragedy is much more a precedent setter, because she had a normal life expectancy, and they starved her to death, based on claim of her husband, who had many reasons for wanting her dead, that "she wouldn't want to live like that".
It sure seems to be their 'cause celebre' right now.
bump
A better idea would be to have RINOLD dress up as a Terminator and administer a lethal shot of lead.
"Get the docs OFF THE HOOK in administering pain meds and other meds, like medical marijuana and this would not be such a big issue."
Ah, yes and no ... fact is, the state with medical MJ are the ones further down the slippery slope here. the 'my choice, right or wrong' phiolosophy can't abide that respect for human liberty starts with respect for human life, so you have 'morally confused' people.
there are plenty of safe effective prescription painkillers that makes the ENTIRE right-to-die effort a huge waste 'o time. But we have the idea that a deranged individual should have the right to kill themselves. The right-to-die folks are under the bridge yelling at the suicidal person "Jump!"
If you read Terri Schiavo's hospital admission, the doctor was able to get her admitted because he stated she was had a terminal illness and was expected to die within 6 mos - even though she wasn't!
The only reason she was expected to die within six months was they intended to kill her. How's that for a twisted piece of logic?
There is no way I would trust this legislation. Not after how they used the law to do what they did to Terri.
"I personally don't see anything wrong with this, PROVIDED THERE ARE STRONG SAFEGUARDS"
Safeguards:
#1) Don't call this killing "mercy", it isnt.
#2) Don't get doctors involved, they are there to save lives not end them.
#3) We are *ALL* 'terminal' at some point, just a matter of how long. 6 months is indefinite.
#4) Patients can be 'terminated' by administering a placebo, and waiting 6 months. If the diagnosis was correct, problem solved. If not, they shouldnt have been killed.
#5) Use painkillers instead ... "If a person with terminal cancer, with 3 months to live in agony," ... The reality is that NO patient need suffer agony:
http://www.cancerpage.com/promos/julyseries.asp
"Pain is one of the most treatable side effects of cancer – but unfortunately one that is all-too-often under- treated. For a variety of reasons, patients are sometimes reluctant to communicate the pain they are experiencing to their physician."
One wonders why a patient would be too shy to ask for painkillers but would want to ask their doc to kill them.
"One wonders why a patient would be too shy to ask for painkillers but would want to ask their doc to kill them."
===
The patients DO ask. But doctors are reluctant to give it to them, even to patients with literally just a few months to live. I heard seriously made statements, that the doctor told them he didn't want them to "become dependent" on pain killers.
That reminds me of the time I was in the hospital and the nurse woke me up at 3:00 a.m. to give me a sleeping pill.
"There is no way I would trust this legislation. Not after how they used the law to do what they did to Terri."
My point was exactly that they should not allow others to decide for the patient, as they did in the case of Terri. That is very different from allowing a terminally ill patient to not have to suffer, if THEY ( NOT their families) decide they don't want to.
Moral Absolutes Ping.
Very, very bad news. So it's a legislative panel. Who will vote, and when? And if it's turned into a regular law, will AS sign it?
The really stupid thing is that people can easily kill themselves any time they want, with minimal planning and effort. This just gives it a veneer of government and medical establishment stamp of approval, taking away any stigma of suicide, and turning the act of suicide into an act that smells falsely of personal integrity and nobility.
It is actually an act of cowardice, total lack of faith in God, and a desire to maintain rigid control over one's life (the last two overlap).
And, as often happens in life, one thing will lead to another.
Let me know if anyone wants on/off this pinglist.
Like Florida's laws? It didn't work so well there. I don't know why legislators even bother writing "laws." Judges just make it up as they go along.
That is the problem -- I don't want to deny people their own wishes, IF they really are their wishes, but I most definitely don't want to see evil people use those law to legally kill defenseless people, the way MS killed Terri with the help of Judge Greer.
I think there should be laws, that people should write down their wishes and it would only be good for two years, and they would have to renew it every two years, to make sure they didn't change their minds in the meantime.
I think laws on guardianship should be tightened significantly too.
But with this assisted suicide law, there is no in between. If the patient merely chooses to take twice as much morphine but declines to die, the doc gets in big trouble.
We are headed back to the Stone Ages.
The elderly will think they are "helping humanity" by getting rid of themselves.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.