I found this article on Facebook; it's about people who want to end their lives when they're ill.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

I know how I reacted to reading this.

Now I want to hear from you.


http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/california-forum/article3480794.html

[Old Codger]

1. It is called

Death With Dignity, it is legal in several states and should be legal in all states. When it was on our ballot here in Oregon their were dire predictions of legal euthanasia and thousands of people flocking to Oregon to die.. never happened. It is in fact not all that easy to get the prescription, you need several Drs. to agree then have a waiting period and need to make the request a second time then It goes before a medical board to be reviewed, so not just there for the asking...Also has not really been used that many times.

[KamaAina]

17. Um, the late Ms. Maynard flocked to Oregon

from the Bay Area.

[Maedhros]

27. I believe "flocking" refers to the phenomenon of large numbers of people

coming to Oregon to seek assisted suicide, which has not been experienced.

[KamaAina]

29. Yet.

With Ms. Maynard on the cover of People magazine, who knows?

P.S. Is a magazine cover really "Death with Dignity"?

[Maedhros]

30. We can't blame Ms. Maynard for the excesses of the tabloid industry. [n/t]

[Skittles]

2. my opinion

officially sanctified and regulated suicide would most certainly lead to exploitation of some kind because there is not an area in life that is NOT exploited......but does this kind of stuff go on under the table in the medical community for strictly humane purposes - I think it does, and more often than we think

[strawberries]

3. I think it's the

way we are starting to think. Before I go any further I am for suicide for the terminal ill. Should that be the route a person wants to take. I want it for me, if you don't want it for yourself then that is ok. Insurance companies shouldn't decide how long we live for. At some point in our life, should we live long enough, it has to be our decision to make.

[RedCappedBandit]

4. Highlights some very real issues

Most glaring being insurance companies offering coverage for life ending drugs as an alternative to actually paying for treatment.

[FLyellowdog]

14. Do we know that this is actually what's happening? nt

[KamaAina]

18. Yes.

From the piece:

When Oregonian Barbara Wagner was prescribed chemotherapy for aggressive lung cancer, the Oregon health plan refused to cover it. They offered, instead, among other things, to pay for her assisted suicide. Randy Stroup, another Oregonian with cancer, received a similar denial. Is there any wonder why? Treating people with terminal or chronic illness is expensive. At roughly $300, assisted suicide is the cheapest “treatment.”

[Maedhros]

28. Also, here:

http://www.patientsrightscouncil.org/site/oregon/

http://www.vaeh.org/resources/Abused%20and%20Exploited%20Case%20-%20Wagner%20and%20Stroup.pdf

http://www.katu.com/news/specialreports/26119539.html

I believe the problem to lie with the insurance companies, not with the Death With Dignity law itself.

[FLyellowdog]

35. Thank you for the links. nt

[CBGLuthier]

5. I think what i always think when health insurance companies are involved

They are an evil business and no decent society would allow them.

[Kalidurga]

9. Yep I figured that out some decades ago

far too many abuses and far too many greedy people buy policies and murdering the people they have policies on.

[LanternWaste]

6. The author addresses a point which sometimes concerns me

The author addresses a point which concerns me in regards to the free market aspect for end of life discussions (i.e., an insurance company offering end-of-life services but not chemo).

That said, my mind is not made up one way or another and I know so very little about it.

[Kalidurga]

7. The part on insurance companies should be illegal

They need to offer both treatment and if that does not work or the prognosis is excruciating pain and complete loss of autonomy then I am a lot better with that.

However, the concerns of the author do not outweigh the rights of individuals to live with dignity. I would never want to be in a position where someone else has to make all my decisions, I am in constant acute pain, and my personality becomes something completely different oh and acute pain all the time. I just don't see the point in being alive just for the sole sake of being alive.

[HERVEPA]

8. My body, my choice

Most terminal diagnoses are correct.
Most people would not choose death with dignity until it became pretty clear that the diagnosis is correct.
Most of the opposition comes from a religious perspective.
I find the cost of treatment argument vs. drug companies paying for the "suicide" drug to be disingenuous.

[RedCappedBandit]

10. Disingenuous in that it's

an issue with for profit insurance, as opposed to death with dignity? I agree.

But the argument that it's an appalling issue on it's own is worth a separate discussion imo.

[KamaAina]

19. Most, but by no means all

From the piece:

As a disability-rights advocate and person living with a disability, I know our concerns aren’t just “fear-mongering.” Rather, legalizing assisted-suicide is a direct threat to our community as well as to the elderly, people with chronic illness and others marginalized by society.

[Warpy]

11. It's pure conflation and fear mongering

Cost driven denial of care and end of life decisions are separate issues and need to be discussed separately.

Cost driven denial of care has been partially addressed by the ACA. It needs to be more fully addressed, either by driving health insurance companies back into the nonprofit sphere or by obliterating them completely in favor of single payer.

End of life decisions, up to and including physician assisted suicide, are now and should be under the control of the person facing severe illness and the end of life. People who are still healthy might assemble the means but few use them until they become miserable. Few use them overall, as most manage to die without hurrying it along, just knowing a quick end was there if it got too hard was enough to ease their way.

Part of the resistance to such measures is the very normal fear of death experienced by people who are healthy. Such fear no longer is a consideration among most of the terminally ill.

The author is also projecting "so much to live for" onto Maynard at the end of the article. No, dear, she didn't have so much to live for, even though she was under 30. I've seen what stage IV glioblastoma multiforme does to people. I would also choose to avoid it if I could.

I would tell the anti euthanasia people the same thing I tell the antichoice crusaders: mind your own fucking business. However, if you want to take on cost driven denial of care to people who want it, I'll be right there with you.

[FLyellowdog]

15. Well said. nt

[Hekate]

12. "For people dying in discomfort, palliative sedation can relieve their pain." Discomfort?!

"Discomfort" sounds like something you take Aleve for. How about Tylenol with Codeine after minor surgery? My oral surgeon gives me a double dose of Ibuprofen after a root canal -- those are "discomfort" medications.

People who talk like that give me an ulcer.

How about agonizing pain that doesn't resolve with "palliative sedation"? How about someone with an otherwise strong and healthy body who is capable (with feeding tubes and a respirator) of continuing to breathe for many more months while their brain is consumed, they suffer crippling pain, lose control of all voluntary bodily functions, and their personality changes beyond recognition? If I get a diagnosis like that (gods forbid) I should hope I have time to make the jump to Oregon.

You think I'm afraid of comfort care and assistance for the disabled and/or helpless? No. I am not. One of our friends lived with MD for decades and decades. For a woman who was essentially a "talking head" from the time we met her, needing assistance for every aspect of her life, she surely lived an active and full life. Studied Persian poetry. Was out and about as an activist for the local disabled community, served on at least one board, testified at public meetings, had friends over, came to meetings of a club we both belonged to as long as she was able. It was cancer that finally killed her in her 50s, and did that ever piss her off. She still had things to do. (RIP Linda: you remain an example to all who knew you.)

If the author's issue is with the insurance companies, then by all means go after the sons of bitches with guns blazing. But don't take away the option that Brittany Maynard availed herself of and condemn others like her to a hideous and prolonged death. If you think a death like that is "God's will" then by all means make that decision for yourself, but not for me and not for others.

PS:
My dear Peggy: I am using "you" in the generic plural sense. I am not in any sense ascribing to your compassionate self the particular qualities that have made me so angry.
Hekate

[CaliforniaPeggy]

13. No worries, my dear Hekate..........I got it! n/t

[NutmegYankee]

22. They withheld pain meds for my father for fear it would stop his breathing.

Palliative care is BS.

[Hekate]

31. Obscenity that treatment to the nth obscenity.

[BlueJazz]

16. I know for a fact that assisted "relief from pain" happens ..

...every day, even in states that are not mature enough to have Death with Dignity in their law books.

The Author of the article misrepresents the Law in Oregon. She produces the scenario that Death with Dignity is akin to "Going to a Doctor" and easily walking out with the prescribed papers and medicine. It's much more fail-safe and complicated then that...as it should be,,.

[KamaAina]

20. In case you're wondering, the author is at least as progressive as I am

we worked together to fight off an assisted suicide law in Hawai'i a few years ago.

[NutmegYankee]

21. Have you ever seen someone die from Glioblastoma?

I have and I find your opposition to a death with dignity law disturbing. Proper protections for insurance and truly terminal diseases can be written in. But completely opposing them and leaving people to suffer in agony is just evil.
My father never wanted to be in a hospital. He would have preferred to die at home and not suffered that last month of hell.

[KamaAina]

23. No, I have not.

And who said anything about "leaving people to suffer in agony"? For instance, I support hold-harmless laws that would allow doctors to prescribe as much pain medication as needed without fear of reprisal if the patient dies as a result.

[NutmegYankee]

24. Many doctors won't do that even if it wasn't at risk.

My father was denied his pain meds because the morphine might have slowed his breathing. (He died 15 hours later) Doctors are trained to prolong life, no matter what.

I'm sure we can strike a balance with laws that provide the necessary protections, but poll after poll shows that people would rather OD on a drug than die with a brutal cancer. I can go into grotesque detail what the end stages of Mrs. Maynard's cancer would have been like. I fully supported her decision and wish my dad had the option. He flat out expressed that to me that he wished there was a way to end it. It was one of the last things he ever said, before the disease took his speech.

[KamaAina]

25. "Doctors are trained to prolong life, no matter what."

In that case, how is physician-assisted suicide even a possibility?

[NutmegYankee]

26. There are always exceptions.

But relying on luck isn't the right plan.

[GeorgeGist]

36. They need better training ...

Cause what you are advocating is just plain arrogant.

[Nevernose]

33. I hadn't considered the insurance company aspects

It figures that the for-profits would cover assisted suicide but not chemotherapy.

A quadriplegic friend of mine -- severely so -- has said that he's considered it, but figures the complications will get him soon enough.

Everybody has the right to make that decision, even if nobody's comfortable with it.