Denying ‘death with dignity’ only adds to patients’ suffering

A “death with dignity” bill that would allow terminally ill patients to obtain lethal prescriptions to end their suffering has been spit out by the Hawaii Legislature like a political poison pill for 16 years.

In 2002, it passed the House 30-10, only to fall two votes short in the Senate. Last year, it was the Senate that approved medical aid in dying 22-3, but the House held it in committee.

It’s time for the two houses to settle their differences, which are not substantial, and extend this basic human compassion.

Lawmakers’ fears of a voter backlash are as outdated as arguments against the bill; polls show voters favor it 2-1, and Oregon has 20 years of experience under a similar law without seeing the widespread abuse opponents predicted.

Senate and House bills, both modeled on the Oregon law and a comparable measure passed by California in 2016, leave little room for abuse.

Safeguards include a 15-day waiting period, patient counseling on comfort options and certification by two physicians that the patient has less than six months to live, is mentally and psychologically able to make an informed decision, and is not being coerced by others.

Patients receive no help from physicians in administering the lethal medication.

Medical aid in dying is infinitely more humane than leaving sound-minded people making informed personal choices to starve themselves to death, put a gun to their heads or jump in front of a bus.

Opponents are mostly conservative religious groups, doctors with professional concerns and advocates who fear the elderly and disabled will be pressured by family and insurance companies to end their lives.

Last year, a local pastor opposing the law told legislators that “tremendous good can come out of suffering.”

He has the right to suffer as much as he wishes when his time comes, but not the right to force his religious beliefs on others who don’t share them.

Doctors with objections are not required to write lethal prescriptions, and the California law bars insurance companies from pitching medical aid in dying to terminal patients.

In California’s first year, 191 terminal patients were prescribed lethal medication and 111 used it. For many, the comfort was simply knowing the option was there.

California Gov. Jerry Brown, a former Jesuit seminary student, signed the law despite the opposition of his church.

“I do not know what I would do if I were dying in prolonged and excruciating pain,” he said. “I am certain, however, that it would be a comfort to be able to consider the options afforded by this bill. And I wouldn’t deny that right to others.”

This, of course, is the bottom line. How can we deny to others an option the vast majority of us say we would want for ourselves?

Reach David Shapiro at volcanicash@gmail.com.