Response to Mercury News Editorial by Ex. Dir. of Calif. Foundation for Independent Living

advocacy, assisted suicide, media coverage, Our News & Commentary Blog

Yesterday, I linked to an editorial from the San Jose Mercury News and commented on it.

Today’s paper features a response essay by Teresa Favuzzi. Favuzzi is the executive director of the California Foundation for Independent Living.

Excerpts:

For the past few years the Mercury News has consistently opined for the legalization of assisted suicide. However, for the third time in as many years, this extreme legislation was rebuked by Democratic and Republican members of the state Legislature. This is not surprising given the vast opposition from over 20 statewide and national disability rights organizations, the California Medical Association, the California Hospice and Palliative Care Association and civil rights organizations like the California League of Latin American Citizens, not to mention groups representing the seniors, the poor and the uninsured.

In case I forgot to mention it, the Mercury News editorial managed to “forget” mentioning the diversity of opposition to legalized assisted suicide in California. They only named religious groups.

Anyway, you should read the rest of the piece. Favuzzi’s essay and analysis of the issues gives you a good idea why the coalition opposing legalization in California has been so effective. There are a lot of hard-working, passionate and articulate advocates in California – especially in the disability community. –Stephen Drake

San Jose Mercury News Pushes Assisted Suicide – Dishonestly

assisted suicide, Oregon, Our News & Commentary Blog, safeguards

On November 5, the San Jose Mercury News published an editorial enthusiastically supporting the adoption of an assisted suicide law similar to Oregon’s – and bemoaning the lack of one.

Predictably, it’s crap. Here’s one example:

Doctors, of all people, should know that for a small percentage – roughly 5 percent – of terminally ill patients, morphine and other drugs cannot control their pain, making the final weeks and months of their lives unbearable.

Where’d they get that number? And don’t they know there are other legal options that exist for whatever percentage of people whose needs can’t be met with standard palliative care?

But the real kicker is that the implied argument here – that it’s all about unrelieved pain – is a lie. It’s impossible to know if the editorial staff is deliberately misleading its readers or writing out of ignorance. But neither is really excusable.

In this table from the 2006 Oregon Report, characteristics of people known to have ended their lives under the law are given. Under “end of life” concerns, the issue of “pain” is number 6 on the list. And it’s not clear whether or not the people involved were really feeling that their pain was inadeqately controlled, or they were afraid it wouldn’t be controlled – both are conveniently lumped into one category so we can’t really know. You’d think that would be important information to have, wouldn’t you?

What’s higher on the list?

Losing autonomy, less able to engage in activities making life enjoyable, loss of dignity, losing control of bodily functions, and burden on family, friends/caregivers.

The editorial doesn’t stop there. Here’s some nicely familiar pontification:

Oregon’s law does not condone euthanasia, as many often believe. The state put numerous safeguards in place so that the law would not be abused. In order to take advantage of the right to die with dignity, patients must be older than 18, be diagnosed by at least two doctors with an illness that will lead to death in six months and be able to make a competent medical decision on their own. The prescribed drugs must be administered by the patient.

It is clear that Oregon’s extensive safeguards are working.

Safeguards. Working.

Guess the editorial staff didn’t get the news about the Oregon governor’s report on the Nursing Review Board there, which found that the Board was more concerned with protecting the licenses of nurses than the lives and safety of patients. One of the cases the Board treated with a light hand was one in which two nurses allegedly “assisted” or outright murdered a patient under their care. Hard to know how much safeguards mean in Oregon.

And it’s hard to know how much safeguards are worth in California, for that matter. Just check our older entries on the deaths of Ruben Navarro and Linda Sue Brown. In the case of Ruben Navarro, a transplant surgeon is facing criminal charges connected with his death, but the medical review boards ruled that the nurses and physicians who allowed and/or aided the doctor in illegal conduct did nothing wrong. As for Linda Sue Brown – it’s another nightmare scenario of medical neglect and misconduct – but, according to professional review boards, no one did anything wrong.

“Safeguards” only mean something when there is accountability. There is no credible evidence of accountability in regard to the professional behavior of medical professionals in either Oregon or California. Be nice to see some before we start promoting “oversight” that doesn’t exist. –Stephen Drake

Update: We’re Still Here and NDY

Our News & Commentary Blog

Just a quick note right now to let everyone know that we’re (cough) “not dead yet.” We’re just really short on time, energy and computer access right now while handling a family health crisis. As to the health crisis part, we’re not through it yet, but we are at a point where cautious optimism is the order of the day.

In the meantime, I’ll try to get in a few posts. Probably one today and maybe two tomorrow. I’m nervous at this point about even making promises about tomorrow.

But I’ll do my best. –Stephen Drake

Recommended Reading

blog recommendations, Our News & Commentary Blog

I’ve been trying to catch up a bit and thought I’d point out a few things other bloggers have been writing about that would also be interesting to people who read this blog.

Wesley Smith has blasted a truly crappy editorial from the Charleston Gazette that manages to praise George Exoo and Jack Kevorkian, while exhibiting total confusion over “terminal,” “disabled” and “ill.” His points overlap with ones I would have made if this had been a different week than it’s been. No criticism here – Wesley zeroes in on things we either miss or don’t view as central and vice versa. It’s worth your time to go read this latest entry, what Wesley calls a “disgraceful editorial.”

Two blogs have been exploring the same related topic.

On October 11th, Miss CripChick wrote “A Letter to My Mom” on her site. Here’s the first paragraph:

dear mother,

please do not take this as sarcasm, but i just wanted to take a moment and let you know how much i appreciate the fact that you haven’t tried to murder me, drug me, take me off my ventilator, withhold food, lock me in the garage, abuse me, harvest my organs, or rip my utereus [girl parts] out over the years.

On October 22nd, Kay Olson at the Gimp Parade followed up with her thoughts and the previously posted thoughts from Amanda of Ballastexistenz in “Mail with Mom.” Go read it.

I am sure there are other bloggers out there who have written things I should be recommending. These are the ones I know of – the ones I found in the short time I had today while I finish getting ready to head out of town again.

So – check these out. And check us out again next week. New content will be going up frequently. –Stephen Drake

Apologies and Explanations – Back Online Next Week

Our News & Commentary Blog

Dear Readers,

This blog gets a lot of visits, and probably part of the reason is that people have come to expect frequent postings here. That has fallen off over the past couple of weeks.

I wanted to post now to give a partial explanation for the hiatus and give reassurance that this blog will be back to its customary volume next week.

Over the past two weeks, both Diane and I have dealt with previously scheduled events that took us away from online NDY matters. Diane is at the INCIL Retreat today.

In addition, I committed to do a presentation at the Fall Conference of the Nonverbal Learning Disorders Association. I’m leaving tomorrow and won’t be back until Saturday night. Here’s the blurb for my session, taken from the list of presenters on the NLDA site:

STEPHEN DRAKE,
Research Analyst, Policy Analyst and Organizer

Presentation:
“No one told me I shouldn’t be able to do this.”

Stephen Drake is a researcher, policy analyst and organizer. He’ll share his journey of awareness and development of successful strategies — a journey in which his struggles with “deficits” have turned out to be as important in helping him in his work as his strengths.

Stephen made his own self-diagnosis as a grad student in Special Education. Since 1998, he’s worked as a disability activist, engaged in public debate, organizing protests, analyzing public policy and other duties related to his position as a research analyst for a national disability rights group. He’s found that his obvious strengths help him immensely on the job, but so do some areas that started out “deficits” common in folks with NLD.

Stephen will share some of his journey, his own self-evolved coping strategies, and some of his own interpretation of what some of the “core” issues are in terms of NLD in his own life, which are a little different than what is reflected in NLD literature.

I might write more on this later, but I won’t be talking – much – about NDY stuff, except how my neurological issues affect my work – in mostly positive ways.

To my fellow disability activists – I solemnly swear not to get all inspiration and avoid the use of the word “overcoming” at all costs.

In addition to the above, Diane and I were both attending to family issues – one of those inevitable serious health crises. Fortunately, while things were serious, things seem to be going well for the loved one who just had the triple bypass.

Barring unforeseen circumstances, this blog will be back to what passes for normal around here by Monday next week. –Stephen Drake