Project #2: Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia in the United States and how it affects the mentally, elderly, and terminally ill citizens.
Source #1 Scholarly: Karaim, Reed. “Assisted Suicide.” CQ Researcher by CQ Press, 17 May 2013, library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/document.php?id=cqresrre2013051700.
3 Main Points
What/Why I will use this article/website:
Source Credibility
3 direct quotes/phrases
"Supporters prefer the term “death with dignity” or “aid in dying,” arguing that because the terminally ill already are dying, “assisted suicide” mischaracterizes their choice. Opponents, who view the procedure as suicide, note that the Oregon, Washington and likely to be enacted Vermont laws require only a physician's diagnosis that a patient is going to die within six months. That is too far out to know when the end will occur, and thus those who take lethal doses of medicine are choosing to end their lives prematurely, the opponents contend. Physician-assisted suicide is the term most used by the media." (P.64)
"None of that would have happened, he wrote, if assisted suicide had been available when he was initially told he had the disease. “If, when I was diagnosed with cancer, I had been given an easy way out with a doctor's prescription and support, I would have taken that opportunity,” he said. “I would have missed the bulk of my life.” (P.9)
"Decisions about sustaining life, allowing it to end or even hastening death are among the most difficult choices terminally ill patients and their families can face. Such decisions also are at the heart of a debate about what is commonly called “physician-assisted suicide” — or “aid-in-dying” by supporters."Oregon and Washington — and now likely Vermont — allow physicians to write a prescription for lethal drugs if requested by someone who is terminally ill and mentally competent. A Montana court also has allowed the procedure. Supporters of assisted suicide say it allows the terminally ill to avoid unnecessary suffering and meet death on their own terms, and they say safeguards in the laws prevent abuse of the procedure. But opponents say assisted suicide devalues life, opens patients to exploitation by relatives or others and could lead to widespread euthanasia of the sick and vulnerable.(P.1)
How Assisted Suicide can change someones mind
The difference between AS and Euthanasia
What Assisted Suicide Means
Source #4 Scholarly: Tuffrey-Wijne, Irene, et al. "Euthanasia and assisted suicide for people with an intellectual disability and/or autism spectrum disorder: an examination of nine relevant euthanasia cases in the Netherlands (2012-2016)." BMC Medical Ethics, vol. 19, no. 1, 2018. Gale In Context: Science, https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A546089873/SCIC?u=munc80314&sid=SCIC&xid=9e3ba053. Accessed 26 Feb. 2020.
:
3 Main Points
EAS, intellectual disability and autism spectrum disorder
Informing the patient about his prospects
The differences between America and Netherlands Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide
3 direct quotes/ phrases
Each of the case reports included the identical statement that "the physician had informed the patient sufficiently about his/her situation and his/her prospects". However, there was no information about how the patients were helped to understand their situation, or whether any adjustments needed to be made to support understanding. One patient (case 2015-24) was said to have been "sufficiently informed at her own level". There is an indication in one case (2013-22) that the physician tried and failed to help the patient understand the nature of her symptoms (flashing lights due to eye disease)." (P.29)
"The question of whether people with intellectual disabilities and/or autism spectrum disorder need particular attention with regards to EAS is an important one - whether in relation to debates around putting in place EAS legislation or in relation to EAS requests from vulnerable persons in jurisdictions that have such legislation in place. The principle that people with disabilities must not be treated differently on the basis of their disability is enshrined in the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, firmly rejecting an approach where disability automatically disqualifies a person from making decisions. However, because of the serious and irrevocable nature of EAS, it could be argued that vulnerable people need special protection. There is thus a moral tension between people's right to autonomy on the one hand and the need to prevent harm on the other." (P.12)
"People fall within the definition of having an intellectual disability if they have a significantly reduced ability to understand new or complex information and to learn and apply new skills (impaired intelligence), resulting in a significantly reduced ability to cope independently (impaired adaptive and/or social functioning), which begins before adulthood, with a lasting effect on development. Autism spectrum disorder is a complex and usually lifelong developmental disorder that can cause problems with thinking, feeling, and language, characterized by persistent difficulties with social communication and social interaction. Although autism spectrum disorders are common among people with intellectual disabilities, not all people with autistic spectrum disorder have an intellectual disability. Asperger's syndrome, for example, is a type of autism that is characterized by average or above-average intelligence." (P.8)
Why/ How I plan on using my source
Source Credibility
Source #5 News :Brazier, Yvette. “Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide: What Are They and What Do They Mean?” Medical News Today, MediLexicon International, 19 Mar. 2010, www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/182951#euthanasia-and-assisted-suicide-.
3 Main Points
Statistics and The Hippocratic Oath
Controversy arguments for and against euthanasia and assisted- suicide
The different types Euthanasia and why are there so many different options?/ How is Euthanasia different from Assisted Suicide
3 direct quotes/phrases
Euthanasia: A doctor is allowed by law to end a person's life by a painless means, as long as the patients and their family agree. There is voluntary when euthanasia is conducted with consent. Voluntary euthanasia is currently legal in Belgium, Luxembourg, The Netherlands, Switzerland, and the states of Oregon and Washington in the U.S.,Non- voluntary when euthanasia is conducted on a person who is unable to consent due to their current health condition. In this scenario the decision is made by another appropriate person, on behalf of the patient,based on their quality of life and suffereing , and Involuntary when euthanasia is performed on a person who would be able to provide informed consent, but does not, either because they do not want to die, or because they were not asked. This is called murder, as it's often againsy the patients will. Passive and active euthanasia. (P.1,3,&5)
Assisted Suicide: A doctor assists a patient to commit suicide if they request it. Assisted suicide has several different interpretations and definitions. One is "Intentionally helping a person commit suicide by providing drugs for self-administration, at that person's voluntary and competent request." Some definitions include the words, "in order to relieve intractable (persistent,unstoppable) suffering." Mental illness: A person with depression is more likely to ask for assisted suicide, and this can complicate the decision. Slippery slope: There is a risk that physician- assisted suicide will start with those who are terminally ill and wish to die because of interactable suffering, but then begin to include other individuals. (P.2,10,47,&48)
Opinions appear to be growing in favor of euthanasia and assisted suicide. In 2013, researchers published findings of a survey in which they asked people from 74 countries their opinions on physician- assisted suicide. Overall, 65% of respondents voted against physician- assisted suicide. In 11 of the 74 countries, the vote was mostly for. In 2017, a Gallup poll indicated that 73% of respondents were in favor of euthanasia in the U.S., and 67% were in favor of doctor- assisted suicide. (P.51&52)
Why/ how I plan on using my source
Source Credibility
Source #6 Organizational:“Death with Dignity Acts - States That Allow Assisted Death.” Death With Dignity, www.deathwithdignity.org/learn/death-with-dignity-acts/.
3 Main Points
Discussing the topic of Death with Dignity with your Physician and your family
Knowing when its the right time to take the medication
How the Death with Dignity Laws break down and the Requirements
3 Direct quotes/phrases
Death with dignity laws allow qualified terminally-ill adults to voluntarily request and receive a prescription medication to hasten their death. As of September 2019, aid in dying statues are in effect in: California, Colorado,District of Columbia, Hawaii,Maine, New Jersey, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington. In Montana, physician-assisted dying has been legal by state Supreme Court ruling since 2009. To qualify for a prescription under physician-assisted dying lawa, you must be a resident of California, Colorado, DOC, Hawaii, Maine, New Jersey, Oregon, or Washington and must be 18 years or older and meantally competent, capable of making and communicating your health care decisions and diagnoses with a terminal illness that will, within resonable medical judgement, lead to death within six months. You must also be able to self-administer and ingest the prescribed medication. All of these requirements must be met without exception. You will not qualify under aid-in-dying laws solely because of age or disability. Two physicians must determine whether all these criteria have been met. (P.1& under Eligibility)
It is important to discuss your end-of-life wishes with your physician as early as possible. The benefit of doing this even if you are healthy is that if your physician does not share your values on this subject, you will have the chance to look for a willing physician while you still have the energy and time to do so. (It may take at least 3-4 weeks to go through the process under death with dignity laws from the first oral request to filling the prescription). The best time for this conversation is when you provide your physician with a copy of your advance directive or discuss the use of the Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) form, a non-hospital medical order for people with serious illnesses. If you raise the issue after receiving a terminal diagnosis, your physician may be less receptive.It is important to have this discussion with your physician in person. Do not ask their office staff, nurse, or assistant or leave a request on their voice mail. Above all, avoid demanding your physician’s assistance. Under death with dignity laws your physician is not required to participate and may have valid reasons for declining. Every family is different, and many families have strained relations. However, even if there has been little communication for years, the months or weeks before death is a time when many people attempt to open up to each other. It is amazing how many families come around to reestablish communication, and offer support, as they learn what their relative is struggling with. It is truly in the best interest of those who will be left behind that you tell your family what you are planning, and give them the option to accept or reject it, or to work out personal past differences. This helps those family members cope better after you die, as they have some good, positive memories.Even if your family cannot support you or what you are choosing to do, by starting the dialogue you have at least given them the chance to understand and grow. And most families rise to the occasion of help, support, and understanding. (Under Talking to your physician about death with dignity and Talking to your family)
You are the only person who can decide if and when you want to take the prescribed medication. This is a decision that is often made by conferring with your family, as they are also aware of the changes happening to you as your disease progresses.A good time to take the medication is when the quality of life has decreased to an unacceptable or intolerable level, and all that is left are days of suffering. The suffering can occur on many levels: pain with every movement, the indignity of having someone you love change your diapers and position your body for you, or the recognition that you are becoming so weak that you might not be able to swallow 4 ounces of liquid for long. It can also include the fear of total loss of control of your life.Your family will probably be happy to watch with you, monitor your decreasing ability to function, and help you make the decision about when to take the prescribed medication, as your time gets shorter.You will know when the time is right; if the time is never right, that is fine too. A significant number of patients qualify for the life-ending medication but never ingest it. (Knowing the right time to take the medication)
Why/ how I plan to use my source
Source Credibility
3 Main points
3 direct quotes/phrases
Source #7 Organizational: “Patients' Rights to Self-Determination at the End of Life.” AMERICAN PUBLIC HEALTH ASSOCIATION, www.apha.org/policies-and-advocacy/public-health-policy-statements/policy-database/2014/07/29/13/28/patients-rights-to-self-determination-at-the-end-of-life.
Source #8 Organizational: “Medical Aid in Dying Is NOT Assisted Suicide.” Compassion & Choices, compassionandchoices.org/about-us/medical-aid-dying-not-assisted-suicide/.
3 Main Points
How the law is in the state of Oregon
How the DDA can help
The quality of someones life
3 direct quotes/phrases
The Oregon Death with Dignity Act (DDA) established procedures under which a competent, terminally ill adult in the care of an attending physician may obtain a prescription for medication to provide control over the time, place, and manner of his or her impending death.he Dignity Act was recently considered, and upheld, by the US Supreme Court [Gonzales v. Oregon, 546 US 243 (2006)]. APHA filed an amicus brief in the case, supporting the Oregon law, stating, “Researchers have consistently found that experience in Oregon does not bear out concerns that physician assistance would be disproportionately chosen by or forced on terminally ill patients who were poor, uneducated, uninsured, or fearful of the financial consequences of their illness.” The attending physician must determine that the person is mentally competent, an Oregon resident, and has “an incurable and irreversible disease that has been medically confirmed and will, within reasonable medical judgment, produce death within 6 months.The attending physician also must inform people requesting such medication of their diagnosis and prognosis, the risks and probable results of taking the medication, and alternatives to hastening their deaths, including, but not limited to, hospice care and pain relief. A consulting physician must confirm the attending physician’s prognosis Finally, the attending physician may prescribe, but not administer, medication to enable the person to hasten death in a humane and dignified manner. (P.4)
DDA requires healthcare providers to file reports with the state documenting their actions.Reports and articles on the experience in Oregon have been published in medical journals. These articles demonstrate that patients are not put at risk when a carefully drafted law is in place and that DDA has not been unwillingly forced on the poor, uneducated, uninsured, or otherwise disadvantaged. Although the Oregon law does not require specific data collection concerning whether persons choosing to use DDA have disabilities that preexisted their terminal illness, there is no evidence that since its passage DDA has had a disproportionate impact on person in vulnerable populations, including persons with disabilities.Perhaps this is because there is no requirement to collect this data. Some in the disability community remain concerned that DDA poses a threat to people with disabilities and argue that these many protections and safeguards are insufficient and that no safeguards would ever be sufficient. Concerns about whether enough data are collected and whether the collected data are preserved for a long enough period of time have been raised by opponents of DDA. Opponents also suggest that unreported instances of DDA may be occurring in Oregon; however, there are no data to support this contention.(P.6)
The quality of dying is a personal subjective assessment, and each dying person, family member, and loved one may have his or her own sense of what a “good death” would be. This may include dying quietly and with dignity, being pain free, and without distress.A small fraction of dying people confront a dying process so prolonged and marked by such extreme suffering that they determine hastening impending death to be the best alternative. Many Americans believe that the option of death with dignity should be open to those facing a terminal illness marked by extreme suffering. (P.1&2)
Why I chose this source
Source Credibility
3 Main Points
Leading medical organizations reject the term "physician-assisted suicide"
Patients rights to Self- Determinations at the End of Life
Medical aid in dying is fundamentally different from Euthanasia
3 direct quotes/phrases
While both practices are designed to bring about a peaceful death, the distinction between the two comes down to who administers the means to that peaceful death. Euthanasia is an intentional act by which another person (not the dying person) administers the medication. By contrast, medical aid in dying requires the patient to be able to take the medication themselves and therefore always remain in control. Euthanasia is illegal throughout the United States.(P.1)
The American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine, American Medical Women’s Association, American Medical Student Association, American Public Health Association and American Academy of Family Physicians have all adopted policies opposing the use of the terms “suicide” and “assisted suicide” to describe the medical practice of aid in dying. And the American Association of Suicidology, a nationally recognized organization that promotes prevention of suicide through research, public awareness programs, education and training comprised of respected researchers and mental health professionals, asserts medical aid in dying is fundamentally distinct from suicide and that the term “physician-assisted suicide” should not be used.(P.4)
The American Public Health Association (APHA) has long recognized patients’ rights to self-determination at the end of life and that for some terminally ill people, death can sometimes be preferable to any alternative.1 These rights include patients’ ability to express their wishes in an advance directive, to appoint a surrogate to make care decisions when the patient is no longer able to do so, and to have these wishes honored by health care providers. (Source 7 P.1)
Why I chose this source
Source Credibility
Source #2 Scholarly:Koenig, Harold G. "Legalizing physician-assisted suicide: Some thoughts and concerns." Journal of Family Practice 37.2 (1993): 171-179
3 Direct quotes/phrases
"Between one half and two thrids of Americans today favor the legalization of physician-assisted suicde in certain circumstances. The public's attitude toward assisted suicde has changed during the past 15 years. in 1975, a Gallip poll showed that 41% of respondents believed that persons in great pain without hope of improvement had a moral right to commit suicide; in 1990, the figure had increaded to 66%." (P5)
" Those who oppose physician assisted suicide unclude many influential and respected groups in America, among which are several professional organizations. The American Medical Association, the American Geriatrics Society, and the American Bar Association have all spoken out again the practice and legalization of physician-assisted suicide." (P10)
"First, withdraw of life support, or passive euthanasia, involves the removal of tubes, respirators, or any other type of artificial support that may prolong life. The excess use of medal technology to extend apparently meaningless life and prolong suffering, especially in cases of terminal or near - terminal illness, is one of the factors that have stirred a public outcry for physician assistance in dying. Physician- Assisted Suicide occurs when a physician intentionally and willfully takes actions that help a suicidal patient to end his or her life. This may involve providing information on ways of committing suicide, supplying a prescription for a lethal dose of medication, providing a syrings filled with a lethal dose of medication, inserting an intravenous line so that the patient can inject the drug, or providing a suicide device that the patient can operate (such as the "suicide machine: invented by Jack Kevorkain, MD). Active Eithanasia involved a physician willfilly and intentionally performing an action that directly and immediately results in the patient's death. Here, the physician is the actor, but acts at the patient's request." (P3)
3 Main Points
Differences between Passive and Active Euthanasia as well as Physician- assisted suicide
Proponents of Assisted Suicide
Opponents Of Assisted Suicide
Why/ How i plan to use my Source
Source Credibility
This source is academic and Peer-reviewed, The author of the article is Harold G, Koenig, MD, MHSc and he's from Durham, North Carolina. He stated that as a former family physician and not geriatric psychiatrist, he reviewed the pros and cons of physician-assisted suicide (emphasizing arguments against legalization) and encourage family physicians to debate this matter
The author of this article Reed Karaim, is a freelance writer from Tucson, Arizona. Karaim has written for the Washington Post, U.S. News & World Report, SMithsonian, American Scholar, USA Weekend and other publications. He is the author of the novel, If Men Were Angles, which was seclected for the Barnes and Noble Discover Great New Writers series. He is also the winner of the Robin Goldstein Award for Outstanding Regional Reporting and other journalism honors. Karaim is a graduate of Noth Dakota State University in Fargo.
Kim Callinan, MPP,PMP, President and Chief Executive Officer. Kim Callinana is currently the president and CEO of Compassion and Choices; prior to that, she was chief program officer. During her combined tenure at Compassion and Choices, Kim has played a leadership role in 1) authorizing and implementing medical aid in dying into five new jurisdictions: California, Colorado, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, and New Jersey; 2) drafting, promoting and implementing Compassion and Choices' new strategic plan; and 3) launching our Finish Strong initiative, which includes a book and a suite of new tools designed to empower patients to take charge of the final chapter of their lives, including focused efforts on helping people plan for a possible dementia diagnosis and closing the disparities in end of life care and planning that exist for communities of color. Kim holds a master's degree in public policy from Georgetown University, a graduate certificate in public health from the University of South Florida and a bachelor's degree in government from Oberlin College. She also holds a cettificate in thr fundamentsals in gerontology through a joint program offered by the American Society on Aging and the University of Southern California Davis School of Gerontology.
This source is a news article coming from Medical News Today. The Medical Review Team is made up of 60 different doctors The medical reviews are provided by the members of the extensive Health-line clinician network, ensures that out content is accurate, current and patient-focused. The clinicians in the network bring extensive experience from across the spectrum of medical specialities, as well as their perspective from years of clinical practice, research, and patient advocacy. Dr. Adithya Cattamanchi specializes in pulmonary and critical care medicine. He graduated from University of California, San Francisco. He works at Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center and is an associate professor of medicine at University of California, San Francisco. He has researched the epidemilogy and management of tuberculosis in high burden countries and published over 70 articles related to tuberculosis and other lung diseases in peer-reviewed medical journals.
This source is academic and peer-reviewed, Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide have been legally possible in the Netherlands since 2001, they provided that statutory due care criteria are met, including: (a) voluntary and well-considered request; (b) unbearable suffering without prospect of improvement; (c) informing the patient: (d) lack of a responsible alternative; (e) independent second physician's opinion."Unbearable suffering must have a medical basis, either somatic or psychiatric, but there is no requirement of limited life expectancy. All EAS cases must be reported and are scrutinized by regional review committees (RTE). The purpose of this study was to investigate whether any particular difficulties arise when the EAS due care criteria are applied to patients with an intellectual disability and/or autism spectrum disorder.
I plan to use this source to show both sides of my battle. I'm not strictly for one side and i want to show why. There are both pros and cons to Assisted Suicide as well as Euthanasia. It's important to highlight both sides not just one because if that's the case then you end with a one-sided argument. I plan to use this article to show both sides of AS/E which are both not highlighted enough.
As this article will be my main source for my paper. I plan to use this article because it goes into detail about the topic and there is a lot of great information. It will define what Assisted Suicide is and why people choose it as an option to end their lives. My source will also go into detail about different stories from people who have passed. This source will also help me be able to define the steps it takes for AS. I also chose this source because it shows not just one side of the argument but both sides and their pros/ cons of the situation
I chose this source because it talks about legalizing Assisted Suicide and why it should legal in more states and places around the world. In todays world there are only 8 U.S states and 1 provide that allows AS. I feel like this source will come in handy because it states both sides why it should be allowed in more places and why it shouldn't be allowed.
I chose this article because it hit one of my main points and thats the mentally ill citizens. I feel this article will show me more sides of Assisted Suicide and what it has to offer for me. I plan to use this source as a compare and contrast source. I live in America but this source is mainly from the Netherlands also this source hits on the topic about Autism and Mental disorders which will really help me to further find my information.
I plan on using this article because it has a more in depth information about why each state has chosen to allow AS and as well as all the steps it takes and what each person has to go through before ending their life. There are 22 main steps it takes to make sure that this is what the patient is wanting. I want to use this article as one of my big sources because its a-lot of the information that i have been looking for/
I chose my source Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide because it came from a newspaper article titled Medical News Today. I want to understand the differences between both of ways that a doctor can assist in death. With that I can see the amount of cases that would fall into each catigory by itself and see what people
click to edit
I chose to use this source because it is a source that connects with another source that i am using. In the other source it just touches down on the topic but it doesnt go fulling in depth and i like that I can use this source to go more in depth with the information on my topic.
These two sources connect because I pulled the source "Patients' Rights to Self-Determination at the End of Life from Medical Aid in Dying is NOT assited suicide. They connect with eachother because they are both used in both sources. Reading from Medical Aid in dying is Not assisted suicide it just for the most part gives a glimps of whats going to be talked about. So from there i had to dig futher and thats when i came across my other source.
APHA champions the health of all people and all communities. We strengthen the public health profession. We speak out for public health issues and policies backed by science. We are the only organization that combines a nearly 150-year perspective, a broad-based member community and the ability to influence federal policy to improve the public's health.APHA publishes the American Journal of Public Health and The Nation's Health newspaper. At our Annual Meeting and Expo, thousands of people share the latest public health research. We lead public awareness campaigns such as Get Ready and National Public Health Week. Together, we are creating the healthiest nation in one generation.
Impact of Question on Patients Responses
Impact of patients' own definitions on their responses
Attitudes towards euthanasia and PAS
Kappa values, detailed in Table 2, indicate that the level of agreement between the reference question and patients responses to other questions varied considerable. For instance, there was only slight agreement(20) between patients' responses to the question do you believe that a doctor should be able to deliberatley bring about a patient's death? and their support for euthanasia. (P.24)
Sixteen questions relating to euthanasia and PAS were asked. First, patients were asked what they understood by the term 'euthanasia' with responses recorded verbatim. They were then asked whether they supported the idea if euthanasia, when felt euthanasia should be allowed, and what actions a doctor should be able to take if someone is terminally ill and no longer wishes to live. Patients were also asked about their views towards euthanasia and PAS using a variety of differently worded questions, some of which were obtained from past studies. Patients were asked whether the legislation in relation to euthanasia should be changed and whether they would vote to legalize euthanasia and/or PAS if a referendum was held in Australia. Having indicated whether they supported the idea of euthanasia or not, participants were then presented with several common reasons that may provide the basis for such beliefs, and asked if they agreed or no with each statement. (P.10&11). In Table 2 the first question asks "Do you support the idea of euthanaisa?" 79% said yes, 15% said no, and 6% didnt know. (P.23)
Why/How I plan on using my Source
I plan to use this source because its all from cancer patients point of view and what they think of it. Also how the doctors take part in the duration of the decision
Source Credibility
My source has 7 top authors and publishers. First, Lynne Parkinson Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Research and Education in Ageing, from the University of Newcastle, Australia. Next, Katherine Rainbird Health Research Consultant. Baldivis, Western Australia. Ian Kerridge Assiciate Professor of Bioethics and Director, Centre for Values, Ethiscs and the Law in Medicine, University of Sydney Staff Haematologist/ BMT Physician, Weastmead Hospital, Sydney. Gregory Carter, Director C-L Psychiatry, Newcastle Mater Hospital Conjoiunt Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Helath, University of Newcastle. John Cavenagh, Senior staff Specialist, Division of Palliative Care, Newcastle Mater Hospital. John McPhee Conjoint Senior Lecturer, School of Medical Practice anf Population Health, The University of Newcastle. Finally, Peter Ravenscroft, Professor of Palliative Care/ Chairperson, Division of Palliative Care, Newcastle Mater Hospital
Table 3 details the major themes arising from patients verbatim definitions of euthanasia. The most pervasive theme was 'assisted death' which included all mentions of external agents to bring about death (44% of total sample). The next most common theme was 'suffering'(41%) and quality of life were mentioned, then simply 'ending life' (39%) which did not mention any agent for death. Choice and own death were the next most common themes. the legal and ethical mechanisms for euthansia were not often mentioned. (P.25)
George Eighmey, JD is the President (Oregon) Following a stint in the Air Force and education in business administration and law, George practiced law for nearly 30 years, in Illinois and Oregon. As an Oregon state representative, from 1993 to 1999, George was not only a minority whip, vice- chair of judiciary committee, and his party's liaison to the governor's office, but also a staunch advocate for the groundbreaking Death with Dignity Act. During the 1997 campaign George debated and blocked opponents across the state,helped block the opponents in the legislature, and cheered with all Oregonians on gaining the option to die with dignity. After the law was implemented, George assumed a leadership role as the executive director of Compassion in Dying of Oregon, which later became Compassion & Choices of Oregon. After 12 years helping more than 1,600 terminally ill Oregonians navigate Oregon’s Death with Dignity Act, George retired in 2010. George joined the Death with Dignity National Center board in 2013. He has traveled overseas and around the U.S. on our behalf to educate legislators, opinion-makers, journalists, terminally ill patients, and others on Oregon’s unblemished record of implementing the law. Most recently, he worked with legislators in Vermont and California to pass their state’s own Death with Dignity laws.