Having failed to get any traction in the California Assembly Health and Judiciary Committees during the regular legislative session, proponents of assisted suicide legislation did an end run around the appropriate process and brought another bill up in a special session convened to address state budget issues. As Marilyn Golden, senior policy analyst for the Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund, told the San Jose Mercury News, “This is a heavy-handed attempt to force through a bill that could not get any traction at all in committee,” said Marilyn Golden, co-chair of the Californians Against Assisted Suicide Coalition. “It’s one thing to run roughshod over the normal committee and legislative process to jam through a district bill, but to do that on what is literally a life-and-death issue is clearly abusive, and should concern all Californians.” (See California legislators revive right-to-die bill, August 18, 2015.)
On September 1, 2015, a committee hearing was held on the bill, ABx2 15, and Marilyn Golden was among the witnesses testifying against the bill. Her testimony began with a compelling summary of the issues:
We, in opposition, present our concerns under the banner of social justice: disability justice; racial justice; economic justice.
Choice is a myth in the context of our unjust health care reality. End-of-life treatment options are already limited for millions of people—constrained by poverty, disability discrimination, and other obstacles. Adding this so-called “choice” into our dysfunctional healthcare system will push people into cheaper lethal options. There is no assurance everyone will be able to choose treatment over suicide; no material assistance for families of limited means who are struggling to care for loved ones; no meaningful protection from abusive family members or caregivers.
This bill protects doctors and hospitals, not patients. It presumes that all families are happy, and that everyone is financially secure and has no one around them working against their interests.
The bill assumes a fantasy world where government will effectively address abuse, under a bill with no provision for it.
Don’t be seduced by rhetoric of choice for a few, into a dangerous policy change that will bring social injustice to many.
To read Marilyn Golden’s complete testimony, go here.
A number of individuals and disability organizations also sent powerful letters to the Assembly committee, including the Autistic Self Advocacy Network, a strong ally of Not Dead Yet in the fight against legalization of assisted suicide and related health care justice issues. The following from Julia Bascom, deputy executive director, is a crucial passage in the ASAN letter:
We realize that many regard “aid in dying” as a social justice issue, and we agree; except that the proponents are on the wrong side of it. Most social justice advocates realize that government statistics do not reflect reality. Oregon’s statistics are reported by doctors who participate in assisted suicide. Most people are reluctant to admit that they broke the law; much less that they facilitated the death of an unwilling person; hence, most injustice occurs in private. Hence, the proponents interpretation of the Oregon’s statistics reflects a privileged experience of the justice system. Given the legislature’s knowledge of such systemic oppression, it is unjust for it to institute yet another means of normalized, invisible violence; no matter what its intentions are. Mainstream social justice activists are working to prevent laws the precipitate systemic coercion, mistakes and abuse. As social justice activists for the disabled community, we demand that the experiences of people with disabilities and terminal illnesses be afforded the same insight, nuance, and respect.
To read the complete ASAN letter, go here.
Despite these and other well documented messages to the committee, in the absence of many of the Health and Judiciary Committees’ bipartisan opponents, ABx2 15 was passed out of the “special” committee. Disability rights activists have long hated the word “special” as a euphemism for discrimination, segregation and second class treatment, and now we have another reason to view it that way.
But the fight is not over.