"Right to Die" Opens an Emotional Debate for Mass. Voters

Pain.

Two of the Massachusetts ballot questions invoked this topic, both from very different perspectives. Both the Death with Dignity Act and legalization of medical marijuana were hotly debated.

Ultimately, legislation of medical marijuana was passed in a landslide of 63% yes and 37% no, while the “right to die”—assisted suicide—question has been conceded by the narrow margin of 51% no and 49% yes.

From http://www.boston.com/news/special/politics/2012/general/mass-ballot-question-2-election-results-2012.html.

Appropriately green...
From http://www.boston.com/news/special/politics/2012/general/mass-ballot-question-3-election-results-2012.html.

With the issue of assisted suicide for terminally ill patients, a debate was ignited to divide a relatively unified, blue and liberal state as well as smaller communities within it.

In particular, my very liberal, small, close-knit hometown began to show some tears.

The discussion seems to have begun from a message sent to the town listserv regarding Question 2. Sharon linked her message to a blog post she had written about why she was voting no. 

 As a disabled person, Sharon had encountered many additional challenges in the medical world from doctors and nurses that she felt did not truly want to help her. The most striking was when she tried to ask for a form to update her emergency contact information before a surgery and was instead brought a “do not resuscitate” form. She felt that her humanity, her own desire for life, was undermined by the nurse’s assumption that her quality of life was not worth fighting for.

Disabilities activists have been a huge force opposing Question 2. They argued that in states that have adopted similar laws, many abuses have emerged, either by doctors and the healthcare system, or weary family members and caregivers.

This worry emerged through the Wendell listserv discussion. If a suicide pill costs insurance $100, there is a clear monetary advantage of that option over the thousands of dollars to help ill or disabled people live out their lives in the most comfortable way.

Supporters of Question 2 asserted that the proposal accounted for these potential abuses. Only patients with 6 months left to live (as diagnosed by a doctor) would be given this option. Patients who are unable to make the decision in sound mind would not be eligible. Those seeking this action must request it twice, orally, at least 15 days apart and then submit a written request—signed by two witnesses—to be considered. Doctors must offer alternatives to the patient, such as hospice, and give two days for the patient to consider these choices. A second doctor must confirm the patient’s eligibility and sound practice of the process. 

In response to Sharon’s appeal against assisted suicide, Wendellites expounded stories of family members who had slowly disintegrated from a terminal illness and had been refused the quick route out and increased pain medication as their discomfort increased. “If my mother had been my dog, we could have ended her suffering legally.  Instead she was a woman whose last wishes for a dignified end were ignored,” one woman wrote in conclusion.

Nurses, therapists and other active members of the medical field weighed in, commenting on how they would want the option for themselves given the suffering they’ve seen.

The elementary school nurse, however, commented that her mother had passed away from cancer and she had enough morphine for pain in order to end her life early, had she wished it. The nurse implied that she would vote no because the quality of day-to-day life was not so dramatically desperate that her mother wanted out.

Ultimately, Wendell voted 80% to 20% for doctor-assisted suicide—one of the highest pro-votes in the state. The internal strife clearly did not pull Wendell too far from its strong liberal tendencies.

Although I voted for the “right to die,” following this debate made me wonder if my reasons were sound. Is it right to push legislation through that may include loopholes for abuse? What about all the misdiagnoses?

My personal view of death was forever changed when I first truly encountered it. I had been to funerals before, but the person had already been long gone by the time I saw their body from a distance. This time was different. I was presented with the stark contrast of vivacious childhood and a man that was only a shell.

The father of a family friend had fallen ill with cancer. It was a shock to everyone that knew the hearty, healthy, athletic grandfather that he was. He underwent chemotherapy and other treatments and generally held onto his lifestyle, despite being told he was terminally ill. (UPDATE: correction: "Tim" chose not to receive treatment.)

Suddenly, his life-force began to drain more quickly. He lost weight, struggled to move around his home, and ultimately moved in with our family friends to be comforted through the rest of his journey. There he further lost body functioning, had a very limited ability to communicate, and lay waiting.

Soon after his hospital bed was placed in the living room of their house, I went over to spend some time with the family’s little girl—who was 3—to give her and her parents a break from the added stress of Tim (name changed).

When I arrived, Sarah (name changed) energetically hustled me up to her bedroom to play in her cozy space, thrilled to have a buddy. As we passed through the living room, I caught a glimpse of a ghost. What once was warm and vivacious Tim, was instead just a shell of the person he had been before. A chill ran down my spine. There seemed to be no justice for this to become of the man that had once encouraged me with ease as I struggled to ski miles in Vermont.

After I left I called my mom and began the conversation simply: “He’s going to die soon.” The next day we got the call.

This experience gives me conflicting information regarding the “right to die” question. He lived longer, and healthier than doctors had predicted. Ultimately, however, he was reduced to a shell of a human being until his body was ready to fully let go.

I believe people should not face situations like Sharon’s where they are encouraged to leave their lives behind. However, I also believe that should one so desire to hasten the already begun painful process of death, they should be allowed that option. Hopefully more discussion will emerge from this highly contested issue, and an appropriate compromise will evolve.