Assisted suicide considered in Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania may soon become the third state in the U.S. to allow assisted suicide.

The Death with Dignity Act is based on the Oregon law that allows physicians to prescribe lethal amounts of medication to the terminally ill at the patient's request.

"Most people do not choose to end their lives," said Dr. Arthur Caplan, the director of the department of medical ethics at the University of Pennsylvania. "Most just like having the fallback to choose to do it."

According to Oregon's annual report on the Death with Dignity Act, the average age of a person who has died under the law is 72. Among those who have died, 80 percent had cancer and 97 percent died in their homes.

Challengers of the bill argue the legislation undermines the healing and life-preserving functions of the medical system. Caplan, who did not say whether he supports the bill, said many opponents feel it'll be a "slippery slope" if the bill is passed and fear the law will be wrongly used against mentally ill or disabled persons.

Earlier this month, Washington became the second state to allow assisted suicide after voters in November approved the move. Washington's law is also based on Oregon's, which has had an assisted suicide law for more than a decade.

Under the (Pennsylvania) bill's guidelines, those who seek to end their lives would have to be diagnosed with a fatal disease that leaves them six months or less to live. Patients have to be conscious, at least 18 years of age and of sound mind to put in a request.

Doctors are also required to inform patients of alternatives to suicide, including hospice care and a variety of pain medications.

For the patient to be prescribed the lethal medications, they would have to file a verbal and written request and then be evaluated by doctors and psychologists who are unrelated to that patient's health care providers.

The suicide option would only be available for in-state residents to prevent terminally ill from collecting in the state of Pennsylvania.

A report last year found that while few people in Oregon actually chose assisted suicide, many more consider it and discussed the possibility with doctors and family members. Many also reported taking comfort from the knowledge that the option was there, even if it isn't used.

This is the second time Democratic Senator Daylin Leach has tried to get such a bill passed.

Comments

[deana]

So Caplan is telling us what IS going to happen? Like, to the mentally ill and disabled?

Otherwise I don't get it...

[Robert Carl Parisien Natick MA]

Caplan is explaining what might happen. its all in the realm of possibility. Dr. Robert Carl Parisien Natick MA. thanks for the article. Very good.

[deana]

Ah, but he says few mentally competent people choose euthanasia. So that leaves the mentally disabled who can't choose... and who Caplan does mention and have on his mind.

He also doesn't give his opinion on the bill. Seems to me he is a messenger slipping and sliding right down that slope at top speed. And someone, we're told, who can't be blamed for what he delivers.

[deana]

PS: Most importantly (and I missed this the first time around) who does he imagine is going to plot to kill the mentally disabled? It's not the bill. That's an inanimate object. It has to be a person, and who exactly is that much of a loose cannon unless they are allowed to and expected to do this dirty work off the radar?

I'm not convinced that Caplan is not simply priming the public for the "new way." The first step in this kind of thing is always to get a mouthpiece who pretends he cares. That's what ethics departments in all these hallowed halls are doing now: Finding ways to look ethical.

People like Caplan say these vague things as a way to get past the requirement of canvassing the public for their input. If no one goes to the trouble of deciphering it like I have (and it sure is hard to untangle) then they go ahead.

I'm relieved I gave my two cents here. I hope it has some sort of statistical relevance as to how many other people will see through Caplan's "concern" and cramp his style a bit.

[deana]

Caplan is busy playing "someone's-minding-the-store" in the Jacobs' case as well.

Here's a quote:

"You don't treat someone as a donor before they are dead," said Dr. Arthur Caplan, chairman of the Department of Medical Ethics at University of Pennsylvania, who is not involved in the Jacobs case. "That's a big no-no."

Chatty.

[Ranjeet]

Earlier this month, Washington became the second state to allow assisted suicide after voters in November approved the move. Washington's law is also based on Oregon's, which has had an assisted suicide law for more than a decade.
http://www.callcarenet.com/products.asp

[Claire Whitehill]

The slippery slope argument against assisted suicide is absurd. This argument could be used,for example, as a reason to prevent marriage--the slippery slope that could lead to gay marriage or to marriage between a human and an animal. All laws can be pushed to absurdity.

I have terminal breast cancer, like Elizabeth Edwards. I think that, when the pain becomes unbearable, I should be allowed to chose to die and with the help of a doctor. It would make my life much better right now--I am constantly worried about end of life suffering--if I did not have the prospect of unbearable pain in front of me. The choice to pass a law to permit assisted suicide is a choice for LIFE until it is intolerable.

A Reader