RELEASE: Disabililty Rights Activists from NDY and National Council on Disability Featured on Dr. Oz Assisted Suicide Show

ari ne'eman, assisted suicide, Danny Robert, Dr. Oz, media coverage, media issues, national council on disability, Our News & Commentary Blog, press release

 Link: http://www.prweb.com/releases/2011/11/prweb8929655.htm

Disability Rights Activists from Not Dead Yet and National Council on Disability Featured in Dr. Oz Segment on Assisted Suicide

Members of Not Dead Yet and National Council on Disability were featured in a Dr. Oz segment on assisted suicide. Members expressed opposition to assisted suicide, but overall the segment was biased in favor of the practice. 

Rochester, NY (PRWEB) November 03, 2011 

On November 1st the syndicated Dr. Oz Show broadcast a segment addressing the topic of assisted suicide. Several members of Not Dead Yet, a national disability rights group, and Ari Ne’eman, a presidentially appointed member of the National Council on Disability, attended the taping of the program by invitation. Ne’eman is also head of the Autistic Self Advocacy Network.

Both Not Dead Yet and the National Council on Disability, as well as several other national disability organizations, oppose legalization of assisted suicide. The groups are concerned that assisted suicide poses a danger to people with significant disabilities, whether or not their conditions are classified as terminal.

The broadcast opened with Montel Williams, who has multiple sclerosis (MS), describing his experiences of pain with MS, his previous suicidal feelings, and his current support for laws allowing assisted suicide.

During the program’s two-hour taping, Danny Robert, a man with multiple sclerosis who uses a ventilator, was identified as a member of Not Dead Yet and given the opportunity to speak from the audience. Robert spoke about his initial marriage break up and wish to die, and his concern that he would have died and missed his current life and new relationship if assisted suicide were legal.

After attending the taping, but prior to the broadcast, Robert wrote a guest Not Dead Yet blog about the experience. In part, he described his observations about a disabled woman featured in the segment:

[Excerpt] Dr. Oz introduced Dana, an African American woman in her late 40s or early 50s with ALS. . . . She sat in a manual chair, somewhat reclined, wearing a ventilator mask. A video played on the big screens, showing Dana before tragedy hit, healthy, strong, athletic… (very exploitative). Then the ventilator mask came off (the ventilator alarmed briefly) and Dana began to speak. She said she had been living with the progression of ALS for 8 years and she was tired. She hated having to depend on others for her care and she couldn’t take it anymore. She said she was depressed, lonely, had no friends left and she wanted to die. Nadina [my life partner] and I looked at each other and said “that’s why she wants to die.”

[Excerpt] Dr. Oz asked Dana’s son how it felt to live with his mom. He said it was sad and that, though he didn’t really want her to die, he also didn’t want her to suffer anymore. Dana’s daughter said: “It’s heart-breaking, unbearable to watch her suffer. She’s had enough.” Dana’s sister, who has her health care proxy, reiterated: “She can’t take it anymore. She’s suffered enough.” It was obvious to us (but I guess to no one else) that the family had “had enough.”

Perhaps unintentionally, the episode demonstrated one of the significant reasons that Not Dead Yet opposes assisted suicide. “I really felt that Dana’s loneliness and feelings of being a burden on her family were at the heart of her apparent support for assisted suicide,” said Robert. “When Dr. Byock, another guest on the show, pointed out that she could just refuse antibiotics the next time she got pneumonia, Dr. Oz asked her directly if she would do that. Dana replied, ‘That’s a good question.’ When I looked at her expressions as her family spoke, I saw and heard a cry for help. But most of the Dr. Oz audience didn’t seem to hear her ambivalence and her plea. They just applauded her wish to die.”

Dr. Oz stated that he supports assisted suicide at the beginning of the taping and at the end of the broadcast. The producers included extensive footage and interview time with the disabled individual and family supporting assisted suicide, which was not comparably sought or obtained from a disabled individual and family opposing assisted suicide.

Ne’eman was also given the opportunity to speak during the two-hour taping. His comments were not included in the final one hour broadcast, but were included in two online video segments (part 1, part 2). Ne’eman was also invited to submit a written article on the topic which is featured on the program’s website.

# # #

 

Disability Activists, Assisted Suicide and the Land of Oz

ari ne'eman, assisted suicide, bias, bill peace, Danny Robert, Dr. Oz, media coverage, Our News & Commentary Blog

Yesterday – November 1 – the anticipated/dreaded Dr. Oz show on assisted suicide aired in most places, although syndicated shows such as Dr. Oz often play out on different dates in different locations. Disability activists Nadina LaSpina, Danny Robert, Ari Ne’eman, Julie Maury, Hope Derogatis and Bill Peace were all in the audience.  Danny Robert and Ari Ne’eman got to speak.  While Bill didn’t, there are several times you can see him clearly – looking generally pissed off at the tone and bias of the show.

Every one of them deserves a ruby slipper award for enduring this visit to the Land of (Dr.) Oz.

Ari Ne’eman was invited to write and post an essay on the Dr. Oz site.  It’s titled Death on Demand: Risks and Responsibilities.  Here’s an excerpt:

There are many critical civil rights issues facing Americans with disabilities and chronic health conditions – but the right to die is not one of them. Over the last 15 years, Americans have been engaged in an intensely controversial debate as to whether or not states should legalize assisted suicide for individuals with significant disabilities and terminal illnesses.

These laws – often promoted as “Death With Dignity” – appear on the surface to assist individuals expected to die within six months to request a lethal prescription from their physician. To the uninformed, these laws claim to enhance autonomy to a small number of individuals already at the end of their lives. Yet, as we’ve seen from years of experience where physician-assisted suicide has become legal, the reality is quite different. Far from assuring autonomy, the legalization of physician-assisted suicide has served to diminish true choice by creating an environment in which individuals denied access to necessary health care are made to feel like suicide is their preferred option. By advocating for so-called death with dignity, rather than the support and services people need to live, proponents of such laws bolster a system already denying dignity to hundreds of thousands of Americans with disabilities and chronic health conditions.

There’s a section for comments directly following the essay.  It would be great to have even more disability rights advocates chime in.

You can also watch video – cut up into very small pieces – of the show.  The Oz site isn’t friendly to embeds for video, so I can only provide links:

Do You Have the Right to Die? Pt. 1 – features Danny Robert after a short intro by Dr. Oz.  (In the opening shot, the guy who is to (your) the left of Dr. Oz wearing glasses and a maroon-ish shirt is Bill Peace.  Watch for him in other video segments.)

Ari Ne’eman challenges Montel Williams directly starting near the end of “Do You Have the Right to Die?  Audience Q & A, Pt 1” and continuing at the beginning of  “Do You Have the Right to Die?  Audience Q & A, Pt 2“.

As expected, the show was very biased.  The show opened with a woman who has a neuromuscular condition who says she’s tired of living with it and has family with her to support her – support her when it comes to dying, anyway.  Of all the people on the stage, Montel Williams is probably given the most time, because, well, this is entertainment and he’s the biggest celebrity there beside Dr. Oz.  Williams manages to disparage talk of the “slippery slope” while at the same time advocating for just such a slope.  He’s fluent in the stats concerning Oregon and the eligibility criteria.  Williams is clear, though, that he wants to end it all when he feels he is ready – no mention of terminality.  And, at the end, Oz the ringmaster of the show announces that he favors assisted suicide – with unrelieved suffering as his criteria.  So good old Oz wants public policy to slide down a slope farther down the hill than it supposedly has in Oregon and Washington.  The audience – from what we’re told by the folks who were there – seemed to be pretty stacked with people in favor of assisted suicide and not too picky about if the eligibility was “suffering,” “dying,” or “disabled.”

And by a strange coincidence, that put them in sync with both Montel Williams and Dr. Oz.

We are extremely grateful to all of our fellow activists who trekked in the downpour that day to get to the show.  Their presence and advocacy were probably the major factors preventing the show from being a total disaster.

I understand that, like Dorothy, everyone was extremely happy to finally escape from the Land of (Dr.) Oz.  –Stephen Drake

Not Dead Yet Applauds PBS Documentary “Lives Worth Living”

ADAPT, assisted suicide, Bob Kafka, disability rights, documentary, Fred Fay, Marca Bristo, national council on disability, Our News & Commentary Blog, pbs

(This press release will be issued on the wires via prweb on Oct. 27, 2011)

(Rochester, NY) Not Dead Yet, a national disability organization that opposes legalization of assisted suicide, applauds the documentary “Lives Worth Living” which begins airing October 27 on PBS. Produced and directed by Eric Neudel, “Lives Worth Living” combines rare historical footage with interviews of individuals with disabilities who led the development of the disability rights movement.

The documentary features compelling personal reflections by Fred Fay, one of the earliest leaders who passed away this year, and operated for years from a motorized gurney that he drove around his home. “Fred Fay was at the center of the earliest and largest disability rights email network in the country,” observed Diane Coleman, President and CEO of Not Dead Yet. “The Justice For All listserv was the best source of information for people in the disability rights movement in the 1990’s, and Not Dead Yet was grateful to Fred for the opportunity he provided for us to communicate press releases and action alerts to thousands of disability activists.”

Several of the other disability rights movement leaders interviewed in the documentary have worked closely with Not Dead Yet as well. Among these is Bob Kafka, a national leader of the direct action group ADAPT which conducted many of the marches and protests documented in historical footage. Kafka suggested the name “Not Dead Yet” for the group based on a running gag in the movie “Monty Python and the Holy Grail.”

Also interviewed was Marca Bristo who chaired the presidentially appointed National Council on Disability (NCD) during the Clinton Administration. She arranged a debate before the Council members between Coleman and Derek Humphry, co-founder of the Hemlock Society, resulting in a formal NCD position statement opposing legalization of assisted suicide issued in 1997. NCD was later chaired by Lex Frieden during the second Bush Administration. Frieden requested that Coleman provide a cover memorandum when NCD reissued the position paper against assisted suicide in 2005.

“It’s an honor to have been mentored by a number of the powerful leaders who tell the story of our movement in this groundbreaking documentary,” Coleman said. “A lot of people question how a group like ours that claims to be about disability rights can oppose assisted suicide, something generally viewed as a progressive social cause. Perhaps after viewing Lives Worth Living, which challenges the prevailing fear that severe disability is a fate worse than death, it will be easier to understand. We’re really just talking about being equal under the law, and a streamlined path to death is not equal treatment.”

For more information, see a PBS press release at   about Lives Worth Living as well as video clips from the documentary.

###

Diane Coleman Counters Support for Assisted Suicide with Reality Check in Her Hometown Paper

assisted suicide, kalamazoo, Kevorkian, margaret dore, media coverage, michigan, Our News & Commentary Blog

(Editor’s note – this should have been posted over a week ago.  The timelag between the writing of this post and the publishing on the blog is entirely my responsibility.  –SD)
I grew up in Kalamazoo, Michigan, so when the Kalamazoo Gazette’s October 1st edition featured three opinion pieces supporting assisted suicide, I had to respond. The authors were three senior high school students who are members of the paper’s 24-member Young Editorial Staff (YES). The paper noted that the students pick their own discussion topics and the views expressed are solely those of the students. There were no counterpoint editorials opposing assisted suicide.
The three editorials can be viewed in their entirety in the paper’s online archive. They serve to remind us how little accurate information about the issue is out there in the mainstream media.
The first opinion writer pointed out that Jack Kevorkian was arrested many times and found not guilty “until 1997, when the Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional for people who could not take their own life to be helped along the way. However, those who are physically able to end their own lives have the constitutional right to do so.”
Maybe it’s just the JD in me that needs to provide corrections: The Supreme Court actually ruled in 1997 that state laws against assisted suicide arenot unconstitutional, but did not declare assisted suicide unconstitutional and left the door open for states to legalize it. In addition, the physical ability of a person to end their own life has not been considered legally relevant, nor has an alleged inability to end one’s own life ever been one of the statutory criteria to be eligible for assisted suicide. Moreover, historically, suicide (as distinguished from assisted suicide) was not a constitutional right and states could outlaw it, even though suicide has not been illegal in any state for many years.
The second opinion writer, who favors voluntary euthanasia as well as assisted suicide, stated, “In the majority of assisted suicide cases, the patients have a condition that causes them great pain, a slow death, and eventual loss of mental ability.” In contrast, according to the Oregon Reports, only 15 % of the people were reported to have actual pain or concern about future pain as a reason for requesting a lethal prescription, and this reason was attributed to only 21% over all 13 years of reports. It’s hard to know how she came up with the “eventual loss of mental ability” factor either.
The third opinion writer stated that, “Terminal is defined as a medically incurable illness,” which isn’t exactly the definition under the Oregon and Washington statutes requiring two doctors to predict that the individual will die within six months. But maybe she looked at the New Hampshire proposal.  In any case, she concluded that eligibility for assisted suicide should not be limited to the terminally ill: 
 
I say we trust this matter to the only judge available: ourselves. But I’m not suggesting we open clinics with “walk-ins welcome” signs. I agree completely with the idea of a lengthy application, testing, and approval process to make certain the decision is made soberly and willingly, and for stronger reasons than a comparatively fleeting low point.
She didn’t say who would review the applications, administer the tests, or issue the approvals, but whether it be a doctor or some other authority figure who determines eligibility, it’s hard to say that “the only judge” is the individual.
With the typical word limit on letters to the editor, I didn’t try to make these points in my response. Instead, I highlighted the point that Margaret Dore has made so effectively, the fact that assisted suicidelaws contain no safeguards after the lethal prescription is issued, creating several dangers, including that the lethal dose could be administered by anyone with or without the individual’s consent.
I was glad to see that my letter was published in my hometown paper on October 11. But the four online comments submitted by other readers all favored assisted suicide, and showed zero comprehension of the illusory nature of the “safeguards” in assisted suicide laws. – Diane Coleman

Train Wrecks and Being Bushwacked in the Land of Oz – Bill Peace, Danny Robert and Nadina LaSpina report on the Oz Show

als, assisted suicide, blog recommendations, Danny Robert, Dr. Oz, infotainment, ira byock, media coverage, media issues, Nadina LaSpina, Our News & Commentary Blog, ventilator, william peace
As we reported last week, several NDYers and other disability activists went to the taping of the “Dr. Oz” show on assisted suicide.  We were able to share the impressions of a disabled man who is part of the Final Exit Network (FEN) who came away feeling that the staff of the show was dishonest and disrespectful in dealing with him and discussing any accommodations to his disability. 

Last Friday, Bill Peace, one of the disability activists who attended the show as a “select audience member, posted a long report on his experiences in a post titled “Dr. Oz on Assisted Suicide: A Train Wreck.”  Below is the opening paragraph:
Last week I received an email from Stephen Drake, research analyst, for Not Dead Yet. He wrote that he and Diane Coleman might be on a syndicated television program called Doctor Oz. The subject was assisted suicide, not exactly the usual afternoon television fodder. To say I was skeptical would be too generous—daytime television is not exactly known for quality programming and I had never heard of Dr. Oz. As it turns out Drake and Coleman could not appear. I decided to attend knowing some members of Not Dead Yet would be present as well. I had three concerns: first, the daytime television model is for tear jerking, maudlin depictions of any issue and this would undermine any serious discussion. Second, would the show use people with a disability as mere window dressing for the viewing audience. Third, would the show be grossly biased. My concerns were well placed. The taping of the show was in my opinion a train wreck. It was an amazingly horrible experience. All my concerns came to fruition. In fact I would go as far as say the show, its host and producers were unethical.
That really is just the beginning.  You can read the rest at his blog “Bad Cripple.”
Danny Robert and Nadina LaSpina also attended the show taping as part of the “select audience.”  Both Danny and Nadina are long-time activists with ADAPT, DIA and NDY.  (Nadina is also a member of the NDY Board of Directors) Below is a an account of the experience from both of them:
BushwhackedintheLandofOz

Danny Robert & Nadina LaSpina

WednesdaywasadarkandrainywindydayhereintheBigApple.We were invited to be part of a taping for the Dr. Oz Show on the topic of assisted suicide. Ourcarservicepickupwasscheduledfor7:15AM.Wecouldn’tfindthevanwhichwasparkedfarfromourdoor andgotsoakedbutwegottotheaccessibleentranceto30Rockbefore8:00.

JulieMaury,BillPeace,HopeDerogatisandAriNe’eman, all people with disabilities and disability rights advocates,werealreadythere.We had each been interviewed by producers prior to being invited to appear on the show. WeweredirectedtoalargeelevatortothesixthfloorwhereweallshowedourIDsandweregivenourtickets.Wewerereceivedverycordially,withbigbrightsmiles,bytheproductionstaffwhoalllookedlikehighschoolcheerleaders.“Areyouexcitedtobeontheshow?” oneofthemasked.“AsmuchasIamwhenIgotothedentist,” Nadinaanswered.

ThoughwehadneverseentheDr.Ozshow,weexpectedittobelowquality,shallowand(especiallyhavingreadSteve’sblog)extremelybiased.ButwehadnoideaofhowgreatthebiasandhowblatantthehostilitythatawaitedusinOz’sstudiowouldbe.

Wewerebroughtbacktotheelevatorandthenescortedintoasmall“holdingroom.”Withsomedifficulty,weallsqueezedin.Dr.Byock, a palliative care doctor who opposes assisted suicide,stoppedintointroducehimselfandweallpleasantlyshookhands. He was scheduled to be on the small expert panel, and we were scheduled to be in the pro-or-con segment of the audience.

Wetalkedamongourselves,decidingwhowouldmakewhichpoint.Verynaively,wethoughtwewouldallgetachancetospeak.Thenayoungman,accompaniedbysomeonewithavideocamera,enteredandintroducedhimselfasGreg.Hesaid he was a producer and askedustoarticulateouroppositiontophysicianassistedsuicide.Eachofushadsomethingtosay and helistenedandaskedquestions.Heexplainedthatinthefirstsegmentoftheshow,Dr.Ozwouldbringouthisspecialguest,MontelWilliams,whowouldexplainwhyheisinfavorofassistedsuicide,thenDr.Ablowwouldargueagainst,andthenawomanwithALSwouldbebroughtout.Gregaskedthatwenotinterruptorheckle,andthatwewouldgetachancetospeakafterthewomanwithALS.
Montelgaveadramaticperformance,grabbinghislegsfromtimetotimewhilehespoke,hisfacecontortedinpain.Hesaidhewantstohaveawayoutwhenthepaingetsunbearableandhewantstodiewithdignity.Dr.Ablowgavesomegoodarguments,saying “Iwouldneverlegallyallowphysicianstodecidewhoshouldliveandwhoshoulddie…physicianassistedsuicideisaslipperyslope…”ButrightfromthestartitwasveryobviousthatDr.Ozandmostofhisaudiencewerenotinterestedinhearinganyargumentsagainst.

ThenDr.OzintroducedDana,anAfricanAmericanwomaninherlate40sorearly50swithALS.Herattendantrolledhertoaspotrightinfrontofthepanel.Shesatinamanualchair,somewhatreclined,wearingaventilatormask.Avideoplayedonthebigscreens,showingDanabeforetragedyhit,healthy,strong,athletic… (very exploitative). Thentheventilatormaskcameoff(theventilatoralarmedbriefly)andDanabegantospeak.ShesaidshehadbeenlivingwiththeprogressionofALSfor8yearsandshewastired.Shehatedhavingtodependonothersforhercareandshecouldn’ttakeitanymore.Shesaidshewasdepressed,lonely,hadnofriendsleftandshewantedtodie. Nadina and I looked at each other and said “that’s why she wants to die.” Nadina quickly jotted a note in preparation for her comments.

AsDana spoke,thesighsandthesnifflesfromtheaudiencekeptgettinglouder.Thecheerleaderswentaroundwithboxesoftissues,thebrightsmilesontheiryoungfacesnowreplacedbymournfulexpressions.

Dr.OzaskedDana’ssonhowitfelttolivewithhismom.Hesaiditwassadandthat,thoughhedidn’treallywanthertodie,healsodidn’twanthertosufferanymore.Dana’sdaughtersaid: “It’sheart-breaking,unbearabletowatchhersuffer.She’shadenough.”Dana’ssister,whohasherhealthcareproxy,reiterated:“Shecan’ttakeitanymore.She’ssufferedenough.”Itwasobvioustous(butIguesstonooneelse)thatthefamilyhad“hadenough.”

Greghadpromisedthatafterthebreak,wewouldhaveachancetospeak.AfterweheardDana,wedecidedthatIshouldgofirst,sincemyphysicalconditionis,outwardly,verysimilartohers, and my need for a ventilator is actually greater than hers.SoItoldmystory,includingmyMS diagnoses,thebreakupofmymarriage,howbleakthefutureappearedtomethen,andtheresultingnear-suicidaldepression.IsaidhowgladIwasthatnolethalprescriptionwasavailableformethen.Isaidthatmeetingdisabledpeopleandbecomingpartofanactivistcommunitygotmeoutofthedepression.ThatIfellinlovewithNadina18yearsagoand,inspiteofmylosingfunctionandattimesbecomingdepressed,Ileadafull,richandveryhappylife.

Nadinapickeduphereandsaidthatlosingfunctionoftenisaccompaniedbytemporarydepression,andthathavingavailablealethalprescriptionwouldbeverydangerousforsomeonewithaprogressivedisability.Thenshestartedsayingthatassistedsuicidewasusuallypresentedasa“choicefortheterminallyill,” buthereweweretalkingaboutpeople(Montel,Dana)whowerenotterminallyillbuthaddisabilities.Dr.Ozdidn’tlethercontinue.Hequicklywalkedawaywiththemike,whileNadinayelled“I’mnotfinished.”

During the break, Nadina complained to Dr. Oz that she had not been allowed to speak. “I’llcomebacktoyou,”hesaid.Buthenever did.

InthenextsegmentDr.Ozbroughtontwomorepanel guests,Dr.IraByockandBarbaraCoombsLee from Compassion and Choices. Dr.Byockwasverygood,statingtherewasnoneedforassistedsuicidegiventheavailabilityofgoodpalliativecare.HepointedouttoDanathatshecouldrefusetreatment.Hedidsoinaverygentleway.Heaskedher:“doyouwanttotellyourdoctors,maybenexttimeyou’rehospitalizedwithpneumonia,thatyou’drathernothavethemdoanything,letnaturetakeitscourse?”(Maybenothisexactwords,butsomethinglikethat).Danadidnotanswer.Dr.Ozquicklysteppedin.“Letheranswer” Nadinayelledout,“shedoesn’twanttodie.” ButDr.Ozhadquicklychangedthesubject.
Montelkeptrepeatinghewantedtomaintainhisdignity.Afewtimesweyelledout“Whatdoyoumeanbydignity?” and“Doyouthinkwehavenodignity?”
BarbaraCoombsLeedidn’tsaymuch.Shedidn’tneedto.Bythetimeshecameon,theargumentinfavorofassistedsuicidehadbeencompleted(ifthereeverwasan“argument”– fromthebeginningitwasclearwhichsideDr.Ozwasonandthattheshowhadbeenscripted). Dr.Ablowwasbooedafewtimes.Dr.Byockwasbooedwhenhesaid,“We’renottalkingaboutchoicebutaboutcontrol.Youwanttomakesureyoudiewithyourbootsonandmakeup.”
Everytimeanewsegmentstarted,Dr.Ozwouldsaythingslike:“Thequestiontodayis:dowehavetherighttoendourownlifeifwe’resuffering?” or“ifourqualityoflifehasdeteriorated?” Onthebigscreensthequestionwas:“Doyouthinkyouhavetherighttoendyourownlife?” (justassloppyandastheshow’s onlinesurvey, conflating suicide with assisted suicide, conflating the right to refuse treatment with assisted suicide).
Thefinalsegmentwassupposedtobequestionsandcommentsfromtheaudience.Weweredividedbyanaisle into pro and con.Duringthebreak,Nadinamanagedtogettheattentionoftheproducer,Greg,whointerviewedusbeforetheshow.“Dr.Ozdidn’tletmespeak,” shetoldhim.“NDYershaveauniqueperspective.Wewanttobeheard.” Heanswered:“I’msorry.”
Dr.Ozletaright-to-liferspeakbriefly.Hecalledme(Danny) ahero.AndMontelreplied:“let’s not pitpatientagainstpatient.”Julieyelledout:“We’repeoplenotpatients”, but without the microphone, none of us could be heard. Ahospicenursespokeagainstassistedsuicide,mentioninghowawoman’slifewasprolongedlongenoughforhertoholdhergrandchildinherarms.Butmostofthecommentswerefromtheother sideoftheroom.Horrorstoriesaboutpeoplemadetosuffer, told by someone other than the person, and you couldn’t tell the real cause of the suffering.
Nadina,Julie,Bill,HopeandArikeptraisingtheirhandsbutDr.Oztotallyignoredus. Oneguysaid:“TheseNotDeadYetmembersareselfish.They don’t care about people suffering. Theydon’twantanyonetohavechoice.” Weyelledout“It’stheotherwayaround.”
Dr.Ozkeptignoringus.Butatonepoint,hewasrightnexttoAriandArihadhishandraisedrightinfrontofDr.Oz’sface.Dr.Ozaskedhim:“Areyourighttolife?”Arianswered:“No,I’mwiththeNationalCouncilonDisability.”Dr.OzlethimspeakandAriwasgreat.HegavesomestatisticsaboutOregon,andeven mentionedtheLatimercase, the Canadian farmer who got a lot of support from the assisted suicide movement when he was prosecuted for murdering his 12-year-old daughter with cerebral palsy.
WetriedaftertheshowtoreachouttoDana.Julietriedtocatchupwithherandherfamily,butwaspushedawaybyDr.Oz’sproductionassistants.  AllofusNDYerswereextremelyfrustratedandagitated.Weallagreedwehadbeensetupandjustusedaswindowdressing.
Thataudiencewasamicrocosmofoursociety.Mosteveryoneinthataudiencewasconvincedthatdisabilityisafateworsethandeath.Mostofthoseinfavorofassistedsuicidethoughtwewereselfishforwantingtolivenomatterwhat.Others,liketheright-to-lifers,sittingalongsideus,sawusasheroicandsaintlyforputtingupwithwhattheyimaginedwasgreatsufferingandnotsuccumbingtosinfulthoughtsofsuicide. Sittinginthatstudio,wesawmoreclearlythaneverhowveryimportantNotDeadYet’sworkisandhowextremelydifficult.

My thanks to Bill, Danny, Nadina and all of the other disability activists who went through the ordeal or participating in what – in hindsight – is a circus masquerading as a show on health issues.  –Stephen Drake