I am strongly in favor of the "right to die" bill. Way back in the early '70's I helped John S Ames III as a State Rep to set up such a bill at that time. It was badly defeated. I hope the time has finally come for this enlightened approach to this delicate sublect.
Avery Lee Williams

I was a hospice chaplain for six years. I strongly favor of giving terminally ill persons a choice. So many patients and families said things like "you wouldn't let a dog suffer like this!' Some said, "Dr Kevorkian was right!" While I'm no fan of Dr. Kevorkian /his methods, the the modern Death with Dignity movement is one of personal autonomy -- and justice.

Look at the track record of states like Oregon which has had just such a law in effect. Patients are carefully assessed, medically and psychologically. It becomes their choice. Very few of those accepted actually follow through but those who do, end their life, safely and humanely. Ironically, once people have a choice, they often want to live until the natural end. When pain and other issues are managed well, they can take it day-by-day.

Either way, people die with their dignity intact, often surrounded by family members, and get a chance to say good-by. Without such a bill here in MA, patients are forced, in effect, to endure the intolerable. The medical profession and lawmakers (who do not understand the issues) do not take into consideration the extraordinary suffering, the misery, hopeless and despair that patients can feel.

I had so many patients ask me "Why doesn't God take me?" and "I'm ready to die." These are not the people who would really choose to end their lives. It's for people for whom life is intolerable and every day a torture. They should have that choice.

Let's be aware that physician assisted suicide is just that, SUICIDE!
And where will be go from here, if this bill passes, it pains me to think about what's next. This is the underlyng issue here, that we should all carefully consider.
WHAT'S NEXT?

I'm on the fence about this personally, but I feel every person has a right to decide. BJM, I'd like to remind you while you capitalize suicide, it is certain religions who have made suicide a sin. In some societies it is an honor to die at your own hand, in control of your eventual demise.

I would like to think that if I was in my 80's, in severe, constant, and endless pain and only had less than 6 months to live and had settled my final affairs and gotten my ducks in a row that I could at least have the choice to end my suffering and meet my maker faster. I don't know that I would ever make that choice, but its nice to have the right to decide.

Since so many seem to be on the fence, it is important to clear up one issue here.
Honor suicides (misleading title), in some cultures, which are not as prevalent as many years ago, are when someone ends their life to avoid or escape the shame of a wrongful act. This is not opinion, this is the meaning of that type of suicide. And many cultures, where this was practiced, now try to discourage that practice, this is a documented fact. But putting that aside, what should be also kept in mind is, unfortunately like many well-intended things in life, there are also those who will find a way to encourage people to make decisions for their own gain or for the wrong reason, which in this case are irreversible decisions, so even if one life is taken under this type of circumstance, it is one life too many.
This is the concern of many. It is very possible that there are people out there who will encourage this decision in a time of one's weakness and vulnerability. Those of us who have faced the loss of a loved one through serious illness, know the pain, but also know that there is a caring, loving, patient, support system in the medical field and Doctors, Nurses, and organizations dedicated to helping patients through these most difficult moments with dignity and kindness, so that they will suffer less, with the least amount of distress possible. So if anyone is still on the fence, please give this some thought.

The entity I trust least is govt. A govt body, consisting of people who believe they are "righteous" and are "all knowing" is very disturbing. Right now we have a body of law called the Constitution that is protecting the people. Slowly, but surely, those in govt are finding ways to get around the protections afforded us in that document. We are now the 19th free-est country in the world. Many third world countries and smaller countries are moving further ahead of us in personal freedoms.Govt, in the U.S. is growing at a very rapid pace, many want this, many like me want it to slow down and reverse itself somewhat. Thomas Jefferson stated that "a govt large enough to give you everything, is also large enough to take everything away from you". We're not at that point yet, but, when those who receive benefits out number those who pay into the benefits, problems will surely arise. Margaret Thatcher said "Socialism will work only as long as people have the money to pay into it": We're getting closer to that point every year. Soon govt will be FORCED to start taking away from the people who are the "receivers". Think it's bad now? Wait til this happens, the crap will really hit the fan then.

Therefore, putting this in the hands of govt is very dangerous. I can see those who know little or nothing, while serving on a govt body, intervening in these matters. Very dangerous indeed. Another instance of possible over governing by those least informed or educated in this topic.

The government is not involved. Discussions are between a patient and his or her doctor. A process of assessment by doctors, social workers, etc. is necessary. Medical ethicists have been very involved in setting up a protocol that safeguards patient autonomy and prevents abuses. These are all legitimate concerns, of course.

As it happens we have Oregon where this Death with Dignity act has worked well.
This forestalls some of the fears and concerns some people may have. Here's wikipedia, just the bare facts. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon_Death_with_Dignity_Act

Anyone can go online and find groups working for and against death with dignity. As was said earlier by others, this needs to be approached with care, but it works, and works well in Oregon. Some people are just against it. That's why we have a democratic process, to vote on ballots questions.

As for the least informed or educated, you would be surprised. IMO as a former hospice chaplain, people of all socioeconomic classes already know if they would consider it at end-of-life, at least by the time they get into their 50's-60s. They bring it up during chaplain's visits. Others would never consider it because of personal or religious reasons.

Did you know that the number of deaths by suicide (just plain killing yourself) have now exceeded deaths by car accidents in the US? That is where I want to put my time and attention, suicide prevention. The increasing numbers of suicides is what worries me.

Gretchen, With all due respect, you are giving out factually incorrect information. One can only assume that your purposeful repetition of your past employment as a Hospice chaplain is meant to give weight to the accuracy of your statements. This is disturbing beyond words as information you are putting out there, under the thinly veiled pretense that you are an authority on the subject, is inaccurate. You should not be posting about an aspect of end of life care you clearly do not understand.

The argument for assisted suicide laws always seems to boil down to “ either you agree with the legalization of assisted suicide, or terminally ill patients will be forced to endure terrible suffering. Aren’t you against suffering?” You use a version of this yourself. It’s an admittedly persuasive argument, but it is a lie and a classic example of fear mongering. It shamelessly uses the lack of knowledge and experience people have about end of life care against them.
In rare instances where pain can't be adequately controlled at the end of life, there remains the option of Palliative Sedation, which is not what you incorrectly try to define above.
Gretchen, if the patients you were working with were experiencing intolerable suffering, the answer was for better symptom management, not suicide. As a society, we should be offering vulnerable terminally ill patients the excellent symptom management they need and deserve, not an encouragement to kill themselves.