California’s Assembly has greatly advanced the availability of right-to-die provisions with its approval last week of a bill that will allow the terminally ill to receive a doctor-approved end-of-life prescription.
The legislation requires two oral requests to a personal physician, at least 15 days apart, and a written request. Two witnesses must affirm that the patient is of sound mind and under no duress.
Although Republicans were mostly opposed, the debate crossed party lines, according to reports.
The End of Life Option Act was personalized, as often happens in creating legislation, by the pleas of a 29-year-old Californian who, a year ago, moved to Oregon in order to be able to take advantage of that state’s farsighted 1997 right-to-die provision.
Plagued with advanced brain cancer, one of the points she made in statements and in a video arguing for the ability to end her life was that others may not have the resources to do the same. Her husband took a leave from his job and they rented a house, and she acquired an Oregon driver’s license and registered to vote. She said that she would take her life in November, and she did.
In Colorado, similar right-to-die legislation was proposed last session and failed. Another effort should be made in the coming session beginning in January.
Arguments for the independence that such legislation makes possible revolve around quality of life. Proper palliative care these days can greatly reduce pain, and hospice provides superb support care, but many people knowing the end is near do not believe there is value in the struggle – the monumental struggle – to squeeze out just a bit more time in that condition. They are content to make their good-byes while they have the strength, and their wits about them and forego the very difficult final weeks and days.
Those opposed suggest the possibility of a misdiagnosis, that family members or medical institutions may encourage for economic reasons hastening the end, or that patients may be too severely depressed to be rational. And there are prohibitions in many religions against taking one’s own life at any time no matter the individual’s physical condition.
The challenge, for those who want to give those near the end of life the option to control their exit, has been to include provisions that greatly reduce the likelihood of any of the above occurring. Multiple requests to a personal physician, in two different forms, with the requirement that the patient be judged of sound mind, go a very long way toward doing that.
(As it has turned out, only a portion of those who legally have received a death-hastening prescription have used it; the belief is that they just appreciated having that option.)
While Oregon is best known for being first in allowing the right to die at the end of life, three other states offer somewhat similar options. For California to do the same, because of the size of its population and its social and political visibility on the national stage, will be very significant.
As it stands, Gov. Jerry Brown has not signed the End of Life Option Act. It is believed he is leaning toward support, but he has not signaled his intentions.
Coloradans should have an end-of-life option. We would like to see a coalition of legislators from both parties take that lead in January.
