Hiding in the shadows behind all of our end-of-life (EOL) discussions about the desire to maintain an acceptable quality of life is the issue of adequate health care, which is basic to a right to live. Many of us believe that there can be no “life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness” without a right to adequate medical care.
If you thought that the safeguards prescribed by Oregon’s medical assistance in dying (MAID) law, and the similar laws in eight other jurisdictions, are too onerous, there are others to consider.
Slippery slope arguments deny rationality, moral precepts, and legal principles. Few of us who believe in a right to die go beyond the formulation of this right as a voluntary decision of one person about that person’s life. The view that no one has the right to take from us the liberty to make such decisions to end our lives except ourselves appears to be the norm in this society for those who are near the end of their lives because of disease or condition. Voluntariness is inextricably bound up with the decision to die to escape suffering near the end of life.
A brief look at suicide historically, philosophically, constitutionally, legally, and practically as a right to all who value liberty.
Last week, I referred a caller to the Final Exit Network (FEN) to John B. Kelly, a Not Dead Yet opponent of right-to-die (RTD) laws. The person was inquiring on behalf of his brother (I’ll call him Carl) about the education and training services that FEN offers to applicants who want to hasten their deaths. The brother was trying to learn if FEN could help Carl, who was despairing of his condition.
This post describes the disease that killed Woody Guthrie–Huntington’s Disease–and provides the story of a man who struggled with the disease until he could bear it no longer.
You may not have heard of the Disability Integration Act of 2019, but it is worth the support of the Final Exit Network (FEN) and the individual support of all people who favor a self-controlled death
In a newly-produced short film, Philip Nitschke argues for a non-medical model to replace the medical model for a self-controlled death. His argument is compelling. If we have a right to a self-controlled death, we should not have to ask permission from doctors to honor that right. As he has said, “You don’t have to be a doctor to understand dying.”
A recent article in the Washington Post produced by Kaiser Health News and written by Melissa Bailey asserts that openly discussing a self-controlled death, no matter how rational the discussion, is viewed by some people as “subversive” or, at least, out of the ordinary or suspect.
Asunción Álvarez del Río, PhD, a FEN member in Mexico City, reports on the status of aid in dying in Spain.
