[Editor’s Note: Following the hearing, the bill was tabled until next year. The following news coverage quoted disability advocates: Doctor-assisted suicide proposal tabled after emotional hearing (Star Tribune, 3/17/16); Minnesota’s assisted-suicide bill withdrawn after impassioned testimony (Twin Cities Pioneer Press, 3/16/16).]
Today, Wednesday, March 16, the Minnesota Senate Health, Human Services, and Housing Committee held a hearing on SF 1880, a proposed bill to legalize assisted suicide.
As usual, proponents hinge their arguments on the claim that the Oregon experience proves that the law is safe. They never mention the deficiently minimal reporting and non-existent investigation or oversight under the Oregon law. They definitely never mention the cases of abuse that have come to light through mainstream press and professional journals, which are detailed with references here.
There was strong turn out of people opposed to the bill, including from the disability community. Kathy Ware and her son Kylen attended with “Not Dead Yet” signs.
NDY submitted written testimony by email to each committee member. Among other things, we offered the following information:
. . . The prescribing doctor’s also fill out a final report after the death, among other things stating the reasons for the request for assisted suicide. Among the top five reasons given are feelings of being a “burden on others” (41%) or feeling a “loss of autonomy” (92%) or “loss of dignity” (78%). These are not about pain from a terminal disease, but are psychological and social issues that cry out for meaningful supports and genuine care. Yet the assisted suicide law does not even require disclosures about consumer controlled home care options to address feelings of loss of autonomy or being a burden, much less require that those services be provided.
*** Still, some might say, didn’t the person initiate the request for assisted suicide? Didn’t they have to self-administer the lethal dose?
Most people who have been reported to use assisted suicide in Oregon age 65-84, in a society where one in ten elders are abused according to federal figures. The abusers are usually family members. About half the people reported to use assisted suicide in Oregon did not have a health provider present at the time of death. With no independent witness required, there is no evidence that they self-administered the lethal drugs, or even that they consented at the time of death. These bills have to be considered in light of the sad reality that not all seriously ill people have loving family. Assisted suicide laws grant blanket immunity and effectively foreclose investigation of wrongdoing.
Moreover, as a person who has been disabled all of my life, I’ve learned that some of the health care that I’ve needed will not be covered by the available forms of insurance, because it won’t cure me and it “costs too much”, things that would have helped me maintain more physical function longer or reduced the help I needed from family. This is a common experience in the disability community. The idea of mixing a cost-cutting “treatment” such as assisted suicide into a cost-conscious health care system that’s poorly designed to meet a seriously ill patient’s needs is dangerous to the thousands of people whose health care costs the most — mainly people living with a disability, the elderly and chronically ill. When push comes to shove over the health care needs of a disabled Minnesota resident, whose corner will the doctor be in? These realities undermine the image of “choice” that is being sold by assisted suicide advocates.
To read the complete testimony, go here.