Attorney Stephanie Woodward’s Op-Ed Published In Syracuse Press

assisted suicide, center for disability rights, civil disobedience, New York State, op-ed, Our News & Commentary Blog, protests, Stephanie Woodward, World Federation of Right To Die Societies, ,

Attorney Stephanie Woodward is Director of Advocacy at the Center for Disability Rights in Rochester, New York.  She writes about how her experiences as a disabled woman inform her opposition to the legalization of assisted suicide in a new guest editorial entitled Why disabled people like me fear medically assisted suicide.  Here’s an excerpt:

We’re often regarded as incapable of making our own decisions and unworthy of respect. However, when one disabled person announces they want to die, they’re lauded in the press and on social media. Sara Myers, for example, has Lou Gehrig’s disease and has received a slew of media attention for wanting assisted suicide because she began to experience disability. Media focused on Myers’s use of a wheelchair and her need for assistance in showering and toileting to demonstrate why assisted suicide should be available to her. For full disclosure, I use a wheelchair and have needed assistance with both showering and toileting in my life, and I expect I’ll need more assistance as I age. I take it very personally when media and society lists these as valid reasons to want to die.

With all of these negative stereotypes and stigmas against disabled people, combined with the praise a disabled person receives when they announce that they want to die, nothing scares me more than the legalization of assisted suicide.

For her complete commentary, go here.

Stephanie has some great history as a Not Dead Yet advocate.  She was a major player in the NDY protest against the World Federation of Right To Die Societies in September 2014 in Chicago.

Stephanie Woodward

And she helped lead the protest against the first assisted suicide bill introduced in Albany this year, which received excellent coverage in The Village Voice, including choice quotes such as “People with disabilities are told every day they’d be better off dead,” says Stephanie Woodward, a 26-year-old disability rights lawyer who was at the protest in her wheelchair. “Instead of giving suicide prevention or help, [these bills] open the doors for us to off ourselves.”  And her other quotes are really worth a read here.

We’re really lucky to have her strong voice now that NY is in the crosshairs.

Rochester, NY: “Don’t buy into ‘aid in dying’” Guest Column by NDY’s Stephen Drake

assisted suicide, op-ed, Our News & Commentary Blog, stephen drake, , ,

Rochester, NY is my hometown. I was born here and lived here until I was 25. After that, I lived on-and-off in Syracuse and Rochester. In 1997, I moved to Chicago and moved back to Rochester in 2008. I plan to spend the rest of my life here.

I submitted an op-ed (guest essay) last week, spurred by the publication of a pro-assisted suicide op-ed written by the Executive Director of End of Life Choices New York (he called it “aid in dying). Ironically, on the opposite page was an essay about preventing teen suicides. Apparently that didn’t translate as irony with the editor(s) of the opinion page.

Today, Saturday, October 31, my op-ed was published in the Opinion section of the Democrat and Chronicle. The editors were more than fair (they published it, after all), asking for documentation of some of the assertions in the essay and making a few small edits that didn’t affect the substance of the op-ed.

Below is a link to the essay. I’ve also excerpted the first paragraph. I would appreciate it if folks would go to the newspaper site to read the whole article – newspapers do take note of the number of hits each article gets. Feel free to submit comments, of course.

Don’t buy into ‘aid in dying’

Recently, you’re hearing and reading a lot about “aid in dying” — a relatively new term that is increasingly used in place of “assisted suicide.” You’re also being told that the issues surrounding assisted suicide are simple, with the only objections coming from far-right Christian conservatives.

A quick note – one item I shared with the editors was a document from 2005 that shows the Oregon assisted suicide law has no real provision for investigation of any incidents of assisted suicide that might have violated the law.  Here’s a link to the document, with its contents included under the link:

Oregon Dept. of Human Services Press Release (March 4, 2005)

DHS news release

March 4, 2005

Contact: Bonnie Widerburg (503) 731-4180
Program contact: Richard Leman (503) 731-4273

No authority to investigate Death with Dignity case, DHS says

 

The Oregon Department of Human Services has no authority to investigate individual Death with Dignity cases, officials said Friday.
The state law authorizing physician-assisted suicide neither requires nor authorizes investigations by DHS, said Barry S. Kast, DHS assistant director for health services.

“DHS’ role is that of a steward of data about the use of the law,” Kast said. “This is a law, not a DHS program, and our only legal role is to report accurate aggregate data about the use of the law.”

The question was raised by news reports about an Oregon man who regained consciousness after taking a lethal dose of medication prescribed under the law.

Kast said the state boards of medical examiners and pharmacy have authority to investigate medical cases under certain circumstances, although he said the state’s physician-assisted suicide law doesn’t require them to investigate.

In its annual reports, available on its We​b site, DHS reports aggregate data such as the number of people who used the law, underlying diseases and demographics. DHS is prohibited by federal law from reporting medical information about specific patients either living or dead, Kast said. DHS reports data every March, and will release the seventh annual report on March 10.

NDY Submits Comments On Adult Protective Services Guidelines

Administration on Community Living, Adult Protective Services, assisted suicide, death through denial, dredf, elder abuse, Health care decision-making, involuntary euthanasia, life-ending decisions, medical decisionmaking, medical discrimination, medical killings, national adult protective services association, Our News & Commentary Blog, surrogate decision making, Surrogate Decisions & Guardianship, , ,

The Administration for Community Living (part of the Administration on Aging within the U.S. Dept. of Health & Human Services) is seeking comments on draft voluntary consensus guidelines for Adult Protective Services.  The original deadline for comments was October 30, but it’s been extended to November 13.  More information and a portal for submitting online comments is here.

Not Dead Yet submitted two sets of comments, one addressing abuses in health care decision-making by surrogates and providers, the other addressing abuses in states that have legalized assisted suicide.

NDY introduced lengthy comments on health care decision-making as follows:

A couple of weeks ago, Not Dead Yet was contacted by two sisters who are daughters of a woman in the hospital. They claimed that a third sister had decided to withhold tube feeding and fluids from their mother, despite the existence of a video taped statement by the mother that she wanted to continue treatment. The third sister held the mother’s proxy, but the other two sisters claimed that her motivation was inheritance. The sisters reported being banned from visiting their mother.   We referred them to legal assistance. Over the nearly twenty years we have been in existence, we have received many calls like this. Given the high rate of elder financial abuse and the aging population, it is likely the frequency of such calls will increase.

Health care decision making laws vary by state, but are supposed to be governed by general principles set forth by the U.S. Supreme Court in the Cruzan decision (497 U.S. 261, 110 S. Ct. 2841, 111 L. Ed. 2d 224, 1990). The Court found that there is a right to refuse unwanted medical treatment, including food and fluids by tube, and that a surrogate decision maker could make that decision for a person who was unable to make and communicate their own decision. However, the surrogate’s decision must be based on what the person would wish rather than on the surrogate’s personal preference if they were in similar circumstances or other factors.

For the complete comment with examples of problem cases, go here.

NDY introduced the comment on assisted suicide this way:

Four states, Oregon, Washington, Vermont and California, have statutes legalizing assisted suicide.   Where assisted suicide is legal, an heir (someone who stands to inherit from the patient) or abusive caregiver may steer someone towards assisted suicide, witness the request, pick up the drugs and, since no disinterested witness is required at the death, even give the lethal dose. APS workers should be educated about these statutes so that can be alert to cases of coercion and abuse and, hopefully, prevent resulting harms to an older or disabled individual.

Although proponents claim that assisted suicide statutes contain safeguards to prevent coercion and abuse, the actual provisions are too weak to be effective. A short and clear analysis of the law’s provisions is provided by elder law attorney Margaret Dore in the article “Death With Dignity”: What Do We Advise Our Clients? https://www.kcba.org/newsevents/barbulletin/BView.aspx?Month=05&Year=2009&AID=article5.htm . Dore states:

The Act requires an application process to obtain the lethal dose, which includes a written request form with two required witnesses. The Act allows one of these witnesses to be the patient’s heir. The Act also allows someone else to talk for the patient during the lethal-dose request process, for example, the patient’s heir. This does not promote patient choice; it invites coercion. . . . Once the lethal dose is issued by the pharmacy, there is no oversight. The death is not required to be witnessed by disinterested persons. . . . With no witnesses present, someone else can administer the lethal dose without the patient’s consent. Indeed, someone could use an alternate method, such as suffocation. Even if the patient struggled, who would know? The lethal dose request would provide an alibi. This situation is especially significant for patients with money. (Citations omitted.)

The assisted suicide state reports are based on forms filed by the physician who issued the lethal prescription and the dispensing pharmacy, and do not enable identification of cases involving coercion or abuse. However, cases have come to light though mainstream media.

For the complete comment, which highlighted three cases described in DREDF’s Oregon and Washington State Abuses and Complications, go here.

In connection with both comments, we hope that APS workers will in the future be trained to recognize and prevent abuses whereby elders and people with disabilities are denied health care they desire or are subjected to coercion and abuse under assisted suicide laws that throw a blanket of immunity over the perpetrators.

Disability Advocates in Massachusetts Conduct Legislative Briefing Against Assisted Suicide

assisted suicide, john kelly, Massachusetts, Our News & Commentary Blog, Second Thoughts, , ,

Today, John Kelly led a well attended legislative briefing by disability rights advocates who oppose the state’s assisted suicide bill, H 1991.  In anticipation of the legislative committee hearing on assisted  suicide scheduled in Massachusetts on Tuesday, October 27th, the briefing received some excellent news coverage:

Congratulations to all who presented and responded to questions today.

The hearing on Tuesday starts at 1:00 p.m. ET.  It is supposed tot be webcast here.

Below is the Media Advisory issued by Second Thoughts.

MEDIA ADVISORY                                      CONTACT

October 27, 2015                                           John Kelly 617-536-5140 

                                                                            JJ Hanson 850-377-5410 

Second Thoughts MA to be joined in opposing H 1991 by Second Thoughts CT and brain cancer survivor JJ Hanson. 

Disability rights activists from across the region will be speaking Tuesday before the Massachusetts legislature’s Joint Committee on Public Health in opposition to H 1991, which would legalize assisted suicide in the state.  The hearing begins at 1 PM in Rooms A1/A2 at the State House.

As Second Thoughts director John Kelly told a legislative briefing at the Statehouse today, “The disability community is full of people who were judged terminal. For example, John Norton of Florence is sure he would have used assisted suicide were it legal in 1955 when he was diagnosed with ALS. 60 years later – the disease process stopped – he’s glad it wasn’t.”

In light of the Connecticut legislature’s repeated rejection of assisted suicide, Second Thoughts Connecticut member Stephen Mendelsohn will testify, “When legislators look at the details of these bills, they understand that legalizing doctor-prescribed suicide diminishes rather than enhances choice.”

Patients Rights Action Fund President JJ Hanson will be in Boston to testify “if assisted suicide becomes the social norm for terminally ill patients, those who want to fight to live will have their ability to survive taken from them.” Hanson, who was diagnosed with Grade 4 Glioblastome (GBM) and given 4  months to live in May 2014, is featured in the video “Man of Steel.” Hanson will be available for interviews Tuesday. He can be reached at (850) 377 5410.

Cathy Ludlum of Second Thoughts Connecticut will testify that “the harsh reality is that those of us with disabilities will be the collateral damage in any formalized death-by-choice system that is created.”

Numerous Massachusetts disability rights advocates will also testify against the bill. And Kelly noted that every major national disability rights organization that has taken a position on assisted suicide has opposed it.

Chicago Action Alert On Peter Singer: The Worst You Can Do

euthanasia, Illinois, infanticide, national council on disability, Our News & Commentary Blog, Peter Singer, protests, ,

ACTION ALERT

Peter Singer: The Worst You Can Do

On Saturday, October 24, the bioethicist Dr. Peter Singer will be delivering a lecture at Northwestern University in Evanston. The lecture is titled “The Most Good You Can Do.” Ironically Dr. Singer is well known for his views that people with severe disabilities do not lead lives worth living and it is better (and less expensive) just to let them die. Please check out this link for his latest statements asserting that health care should be denied to people with severe disabilities. Most notably, he has stated that society should acknowledge the necessity of “intentionally ending the lives of severely disabled infants.”

We at Access Living invite disability advocates and allies to join us in picketing Dr. Singer’s lecture, to let those in attendance know that his so-called “philosophy” is an attack on the lives of people with disabilities. The lecture series is a part of the Chicago Humanities Festival.

We join our friends at the national disability organization Not Dead Yet in holding that because society stigmatizes the lives of people with disabilities, it is far too easy to kill us or let us die with the assumption that we are a “burden” or “better off.” Assisted suicide practices, futility policies, “mercy killings,” and surrogate decisions are all expressions of society’s bias against people with disabilities.

If you want to join us to picket the lecture, please meet on Saturday at 2 pm at the west side of the Norris University Center at 1999 Campus Drive at Northwestern University, Evanston. We will picket until 4 pm. The actual lecture is from 2:30 to 3:30 pm and is sold out.

Please RSVP to Amber Smock, Director of Advocacy at Access Living, if you plan to attend this picket by emailing asmock@accessliving.org. 

To learn more about Dr. Singer and his views on people with disabilities, please see this link as well as the National Council on Disability’s April 2015 response to Dr. Singer’s advocacy of the killing of disabled babies at this link.

Thank you to our friends at Not Dead Yet for their resistance against society’s assumption that we are “better off dead.”