Page 1 of 16
1
2
3
11
... LastLast
  1. #1
    Banned Tennis's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    You wish you lived here
    Posts
    11,771

    Exclamation 111 people died under California's new "legalized suicide law"

    (CNN)One hundred eleven people died last year under California's new right-to-die law, according to a report released Tuesday by the state's Department of Public Health.
    The End of Life Option Act went into effect on June 9, 2016. It allows for California residents, age 18 and older, to request life-ending medication from their doctor if they are suffering from a terminal illness and want to set their own timetable for their death.

    Between June 9 and December 31, 2016, 258 people initiated the process, according to the report. One hundred ninety-one people were prescribed the lethal medication, of which 111 patients "were reported by their physician to have died following ingestion of aid-in-dying drugs prescribed under EOLA." Twenty-one people died as a result of their underlying terminal illness, and the outcome of the other 59 people who were prescribed drugs "is currently undetermined, as there has been no outcome reported for these individuals within the time period covered by this report."

    The majority of the 111 people who utilized the law were cancer patients, according to the report. The median age at time of death was 73. Most patients were white (89.5%), enrolled in hospice/palliative care (83.8%), and were covered by some type of health insurance (96.4%). Sixty women and 51 men died as a result of ingesting aid-in-dying drugs.
    "The state's data show that even during the early months of the law's implementation, the law was working well and terminally ill Californians were able to take comfort in knowing that they had this option to peacefully end intolerable suffering," Compassion & Choices California State Director Matt Whitaker said in a statement. "We continue to work to ensure that every terminally ill Californian has equal access to all end-of-life care options, including hospice, pain control, palliative care and medical aid in dying." The nonprofit organization helped to get the law passed in California, and advocates for similar legislation nationwide.

    In California, a mentally competent adult is eligible to partake in the End of Life Option Act if he or she is determined to have a terminal illness -- meaning they have six months or less to live. The patient must make two verbal requests of their doctor, at least 15 days apart, as well as one written request. The patient must affirm his or her request 48 hours before ingesting the medication, which they must be able to self-administer
    , without the help of a physician, family member or friend.
    Physician-assisted aid-in-dying is different from euthanasia (commonly referred to as physician-assisted suicide), which is illegal in all 50 states. Aid-in-dying advocates such as former California state Sen. Lois Wolk and state Sen. Bill Monning -- who co-authored the End of Life Option Act -- dislike the term "suicide," because it implies an impulsive and irrational act.
    "Is this suicide?" CNN Chief Medical Correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta pointedly asked the pair in an interview last year.
    "No, not at all," said Wolk.

    "The person is dying. The people we've met with -- they want to live," said Monning. "They're not choosing death. That decision has been made unfortunately because of an uncontrolled disease, a terminal cancer. ... What this does is allows them to gain autonomy, self-determination in what will be the path of that certain death."

    Both Wolk and Monning said it was important that any attempt to influence a person to hasten his or her own death under their bill would be cause for felony prosecution.
    "The health plans cannot influence a patient in their choices," said Monning. "They're not mandated to cover the costs. Some may, some may not ... but no plan can say, 'You can't pursue (an expensive or long-term) treatment option; we want you to use this end of life option.' That's cause for a felony."
    Under California's law, the cause of death that is listed on an official death certificate is the underlying terminal illness, such as cancer -- not "suicide" or use of the End of Life Option Act. That has important implications not only for patient confidentiality, but also for sensitive family matters such as a will or life insurance.
    The legacy of Brittany Maynard
    In 2014, 29-year-old Brittany Maynard brought the right-to-die movement back into the country's consciousness. On New Year's Day, she found out that she had brain cancer. After multiple procedures to remove part of the tumor, Maynard learned that it had come back and was more aggressive. Doctors said she had fewer than six months to live.

    "I do not want to die. But I am dying," she wrote in an emotional essay for CNN in October 2014. "And I want to die on my own terms."

    Because California had not yet legalized medical aid in dying, Maynard and her husband, Dan Diaz, moved to Oregon to utilize that state's Death With Dignity law.
    Oregon was the first state to enact such a law, in 1997. In the 18 years after, 1,545 prescriptions have been written for a lethal dose of medication, of which 991 patients used that prescription to hasten their death, according to a study released in April. Most of those patients, like Maynard, had cancer.
    Maynard made a series of videos with Compassion & Choices, the medical aid-in-dying advocacy group.
    "I can't even tell you the amount of relief it provides me to know that I don't have to die the way that it's been described to me that my brain tumor would take me on its own," Maynard said in the first video.
    Maynard and Diaz had been married just over a year when she was diagnosed with cancer. Uprooting their lives in California to move to Oregon was challenging for their entire family.

    "That was one of the worst things, having to leave our home at that time," Diaz told CNN's Dr. Sanjay Gupta in an interview last year. "We move to Oregon; Brittany applies for this (lethal) medication; she puts it in the cupboard, and that's it.
    "We continue doing everything we can to extend her life," Diaz said. "The fact that we had that medication, it didn't change anything with regards to her battling cancer or her fighting. When you have cancer, you fight. That's what you do."
    On the morning of November 1, 2014, Maynard had a small seizure.

    "It passed," Diaz said, "so we slept a little bit later that day. ... We had breakfast. Brittany wanted to go for a walk, so we did. We took the dogs -- because, again -- being outdoors, that's what fed Brittany's soul.


    "When we got back to the house ... she just told me, she says, 'Dan, it's time. It's my time,' " he recalled. "The suffering that she had endured leading up to that day, the seizure that morning, was a reminder of what she was risking -- that if a seizure or a stroke occurs as her symptoms get worse, if she loses the ability to self-administer, if she suffers a stroke and she loses the ability to stand, walk or swallow, all of a sudden she's now trapped in her own body, and she's trapped dying the very way she was trying to avoid.

    "It was around 4 o'clock in the afternoon," Diaz remembered. "She wrote a final passage in her Facebook, kind of a letter to all her friends and loved ones, and within five minutes of taking that medication, Brittany fell asleep, just like I've seen her do a thousand times before. In 30 minutes, the medication slows brain function, including the parts that control breathing, so her respirations drop to a point where she passed away. That was the gentle passing that Brittany had, and that's not the gentle passing that she would have had if the brain tumor would have continued to run its course."

    http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/28/health...-bn/index.html

    Rather disturbing. We can only hope public opinion changes so that the law can be reversed. Why in the world are we encouraging this?

  2. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by Tennisace View Post
    http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/28/health...-bn/index.html

    Rather disturbing. We can only hope public opinion changes so that the law can be reversed. Why in the world are we encouraging this?
    Because, living for years in debilitating pain while causing your friends and family untolds amount of $$$$ to keep you alive, when there is literally 0 chance you are going to live.

    Prolonging suffering is torture, why do you condone torture Tennisace?

  3. #3
    The Insane Underverse's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    The Underverse
    Posts
    16,333
    Most of them have terminal cancer. They are a drain on society, and they are suffering. They are also making this decision for themselves. Why exactly do you think this is a bad thing?

  4. #4
    Because people wouldn't stop committing suicide if the law changed, they'd just endure a more painful death.
    Last edited by Shadowmelded; 2017-06-29 at 10:35 PM.

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Nilinor View Post
    Because, living for years in debilitating pain while causing your friends and family untolds amount of $$$$ to keep you alive, when there is literally 0 chance you are going to live.

    Prolonging suffering is torture, why do you condone torture Tennisace?
    Well I don't think he's capable of understanding that, here's why. Everybody should have the right to do whatever the fuck they want with their lives. Don't wanna live anymore? Off yourself, your choice

  6. #6
    The Lightbringer Zethras's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Acherus is my home.
    Posts
    3,192
    I was going to post something lengthy, but these above two pretty much covered it.

    Forcing life upon someone who is suffering immeasurably should be classified as torture.
    Walking with a friend in the dark is better than walking alone in the light.
    So I chose the path of the Ebon Blade, and not a day passes where i've regretted it.
    I am eternal, I am unyielding, I am UNDYING.
    I am Zethras, and my blood will be the end of you.

  7. #7
    Bloodsail Admiral Vapo's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    1,066
    Quote Originally Posted by Tennisace View Post
    http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/28/health...-bn/index.html

    Rather disturbing. We can only hope public opinion changes so that the law can be reversed. Why in the world are we encouraging this?
    Who are you to torture people? I for one rather die painless death than suffer what my grandmother went through after she had stroke.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Tennisace View Post
    http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/28/health...-bn/index.html

    Rather disturbing. We can only hope public opinion changes so that the law can be reversed. Why in the world are we encouraging this?
    The only thing disturbing about this is our own mortality. The checks-and-balances in place here are quite suitable.

  9. #9
    The Patient Nerdgasm's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Under a bridge
    Posts
    251
    Quote Originally Posted by Tennisace View Post
    Rather disturbing. We can only hope public opinion changes so that the law can be reversed.
    I hope public opinion changes and this becomes allowed everywhere.

    We are talking about terminal ilnesses here, not healthy people with bright future ahead deciding to die.

    The entire story from the family you bolded is the perfect example of why this should be allowed. You fight, until you can't anymore. Then you can decide to continue fighting because you want or you can choose to end your suffering. I can't legally call myself a doctor yet, but take this as my health professional opinion.

    This isn't even in the grey area of a family member deciding for euthanasia.
    Last edited by Nerdgasm; 2017-06-29 at 10:42 PM.

  10. #10
    Banned Tennis's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    You wish you lived here
    Posts
    11,771
    Quote Originally Posted by Quetzl View Post
    Most of them have terminal cancer. They are a drain on society, and they are suffering. They are also making this decision for themselves. Why exactly do you think this is a bad thing?
    We should do what we can to make their final days as peaceful as possible. Not give them the means to end their life. That's not right!

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Nasukkin View Post
    The only thing disturbing about this is our own mortality. The checks-and-balances in place here are quite suitable.
    Sounds like quite a slippery slope. How long before people try to get the disabled, the poor or mentally ill to follow suit?

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Tennisace View Post
    http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/28/health...-bn/index.html

    Rather disturbing. We can only hope public opinion changes so that the law can be reversed. Why in the world are we encouraging this?
    You are right we should outlaw it. Arrest their corpses!
    "Privilege is invisible to those who have it."

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Tennisace View Post
    http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/28/health...-bn/index.html

    Rather disturbing. We can only hope public opinion changes so that the law can be reversed. Why in the world are we encouraging this?
    Simple. Bodily Autonomy.
    “The biggest communication problem is we do not listen to understand. We listen to reply,” Stephen Covey.

  13. #13
    The Insane Revi's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    The land of the ice and snow.
    Posts
    15,628
    If it's one thing you should truly own, it's your own life. People should be allowed to make the thoroughly thought through decision to end it.

  14. #14
    Over 9000! Santti's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    9,117
    Quote Originally Posted by Tennisace View Post
    We should do what we can to make their final days as peaceful as possible. Not give them the means to end their life. That's not right!
    Why is it not right?

  15. #15
    Banned Tennis's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    You wish you lived here
    Posts
    11,771
    Quote Originally Posted by Sicari View Post
    Simple. Bodily Autonomy.
    So you support self harm?

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Tennisace View Post
    We should do what we can to make their final days as peaceful as possible. Not give them the means to end their life. That's not right!

    - - - Updated - - -



    Sounds like quite a slippery slope. How long before people try to get the disabled, the poor or mentally ill to follow suit?
    Forcing people to endure helplessness and agony against their will is extremely cruel. Why do you believe being so cruel is right? Because of your slippery slope fallacy?

    I certainly support self-harm if someone has terminal cancer and wants to die on their own terms.

  17. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Tennisace View Post
    We should do what we can to make their final days as peaceful as possible. Not give them the means to end their life. That's not right!
    That's the thing there isn't a choice for a peaceful end, it is prolonged torture for those people to be alive. The choice is simple live in agonizing pain for X amount of months/years or have a choice to come to the same outcome without the agonizing pain.

    You think these choices would be made if there was a way to prolongs their life without the pain? Of course not but if there isn't we should have no right to not give them what they want a painless end to a torture.

  18. #18
    Suicide....legal?

    That's...fucked up.

  19. #19
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Sicari View Post
    Simple. Bodily Autonomy.
    You want a tatoo? you can get one because of body autonomy. But the government won't be the one holding the needle.
    Body autonomy only implies that the government won't legislate what you can or can't do with your body. Not that it'll give you the means to do what you want with it.

  20. #20
    The Patient Nerdgasm's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Under a bridge
    Posts
    251
    Quote Originally Posted by Tennisace View Post
    We should do what we can to make their final days as peaceful as possible. Not give them the means to end their life. That's not right!
    So, for most cases, inducing people to a coma until they die? Whoopitdoo, this is so peaceful and beautiful.

    Real life isn't like your average death bed movie scene. Palliative care can go only alleviate pain to a point. People with terminal illnesses should be allowed to decide what they want to do and when.

    This isn't even close to most euthanasia ethical dilemmas. They're not subverting the doctor's job and they're not making anyone else decide.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •