Wa. State Has 1st Death Under State's Assisted Suicide Law

Grummer said:
this is interesting, I wonder why we have this in the discourse now than say about 20 or 30 years ago?
Click to expand...

Probably because we understand more about cancer and how it affects people physically and emotionally. Over the past 30 years, a great deal of information has come to pass about how specific types of cancer impact the body as well as the mental toll it takes on the person who has it.
 
Bottesini said:
If she was diagnosed last month, they must not have followed the three requests, each a month apart rule!
Click to expand...

I mispoke. The original Death with Dignity legislation on which this was modeled was 2 requests separated by 30 days. The Washington State law is 2 requests separated by 15 days, as is the Oregon Law.

The patient must meet certain criteria to be able to request to participate in the Act. Then, the following steps must be fulfilled: 1) the patient must make two oral requests to the attending physician, separated by at least 15 days; 2) the patient must provide a written request to the attending physician, signed in the presence of two witnesses, at least one of whom is not related to the patient; 3) the attending physician and a consulting physician must confirm the patient's diagnosis and prognosis; 4) the attending physician and a consulting physician must determine whether the patient is capable of making and communicating health care decisions for him/herself; 5) if either physician believes the patient's judgment is impaired by a psychiatric or psychological disorder (such as depression), the patient must be referred for a psychological examination; 6) the attending physician must inform the patient of feasible alternatives to the Act including comfort care, hospice care, and pain control; 7) the attending physician must request, but may not require, the patient to notify their next-of-kin of the prescription request. A patient can rescind a request at any time and in any manner. The attending physician will also offer the patient an opportunity to rescind his/her request at the end of the 15-day waiting period following the initial request to participate.
 
deafdyke said:
As long as the qualifications are strict, then YES......PAS should be an option.
Maybe they should give it another name besides PAS......PAE.
Click to expand...

Strict guidelines already exist when it comes to PAS. As already stated, a person must be diagnosed by 3 doctors with a terminal illness, have only 6 months remaining to live and the person requesting PAS must administer their pain medication themselves.
 
jillio said:
Agree with the above. People need to read and understand exactly what the Death with Dignity Act is all about before making a decision whether it is good or bad. There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding out there about this law.
Click to expand...

I hope this does not become a law in every state! I was a health aide for 9 years and I have seen how my state cut back on care for the seniors! I do not trust my state, it could try and use this law to kill senoirs to save money! I had clients that had their pills cuts back to save money! The state
did NOT care if my clients were in pain as long as they saving a few bucks!
 
whatdidyousay! said:
I hope this does not become a law in every state! I was a health aide for 9 years and I have seen how my state cut back on care for the seniors! I do not trust my state, it could try and use this law to kill senoirs to save money! I had clients that had their pills cuts back to save money! The state
did NOT care if my clients were in pain as long as they saving a few bucks!
Click to expand...

Please click on the link and read the law. It specifically states that no one can request PAS based solely on age or disability. The patient has to have been diagnosed with a terminal illness and have less than 6 months to live. The patient has to decide for themselves that this is what they want to do. It has absolutely nothing to do with cut backs in MediCare.
 
jillio said:
Please kick on the link...
Click to expand...

I thought this was an interesting typo. Note that I am not pointing this out to embarrass you Jillio. I just thought it was one of the most creative typos I've seen. :)

Oops. Forget that. I just noticed the edit in your post. :)
 
Hear Again said:
I thought this was an interesting typo. Note that I am not pointing this out to embarrass you Jillio. I just thought it was one of the most creative typos I've seen. :)
Click to expand...

LOL. I've already gone back and edited it. I was talking with someone while I was typing...so much for split attention!:giggle:
 
whatdidyousay! said:
I hope this does not become a law in every state! I was a health aide for 9 years and I have seen how my state cut back on care for the seniors! I do not trust my state, it could try and use this law to kill senoirs to save money! I had clients that had their pills cuts back to save money! The state
did NOT care if my clients were in pain as long as they saving a few bucks!
Click to expand...

This is a flaw in our nation's health care system. People who are dying of terminal illness should not be denied the right to die with dignity and grace. They should be allowed to decide for themselves whether or not they choose to continue living with an illness that causes a great deal of emotional and physical pain. No one should have the right to take that decision away from another.
 
That's a long time for the first suicide asssited person to pass away after the law was passed. I was surprised ONLY 401 people has died in Oregon since 1997.
 
sequoias said:
That's a long time for the first suicide asssited person to pass away after the law was passed. I was surprised ONLY 401 people has died in Oregon since 1997.
Click to expand...

Exactly. People are not lining up to take advantage of this law. In fact, it has been shown that when a law such as this is enacted, palliative care actually increases, and most, once palliative care has been increased, don't feel the need to follow through on their request.
 
The pain these people must be in is unthinkable. They have to request it three times and have to think about it for a month between each request. I think it is very sensibly set up.
Click to expand...
Oh definilty. Is there a "master list" of conditions where the paitent would be eligable for PAS?
 
Exactly. People are not lining up to take advantage of this law. In fact, it has been shown that when a law such as this is enacted, palliative care actually increases, and most, once palliative care has been increased, don't feel the need to follow through on their request.
Click to expand...
Exactly! Most "terminally ill" folks can be taken care of via hoispice and pallative care. There's some pretty good painkilling meds out there. However for those who have profound unrelenting pain with no hope of remission whatsoever, this is a very good option. After all, only about 400 people took advantage of this in about twelve years. That means that the safeguards are working.
I thought I read somewhere that before the death with dignity law was passed, some docs would prescribe meds "off label" The death with dignity act was basicly to protect docs from "malpractice" or whatever.....right?
 
deafdyke said:
Exactly! Most "terminally ill" folks can be taken care of via hoispice and pallative care. There's some pretty good painkilling meds out there. However for those who have profound unrelenting pain with no hope of remission whatsoever, this is a very good option. After all, only about 400 people took advantage of this in about twelve years. That means that the safeguards are working.
I thought I read somewhere that before the death with dignity law was passed, some docs would prescribe meds "off label" The death with dignity act was basicly to protect docs from "malpractice" or whatever.....right?
Click to expand...

No, not right. Death with Dignity was passed to preserve patient autonomy. Prescribing off label has absolutely nothing to do with it. And prescribing off label does not, in and of itself, constitute malpractice.
 
deafdyke said:
I thought I read somewhere that before the death with dignity law was passed, some docs would prescribe meds "off label"
Click to expand...

One of the meds I take addresses two symptoms that I have -- one of them is considered off label. Does this mean I should sue my doctor because he isn't treating my condition/illness with a med that has been approved by the FDA for treating such? Of course not. As Jillio pointed out, meds are prescribed off label all the time, but this does not mean it is indicative of malpractice.
 
Even if you felt you could sue your doctor for prescribing off-label meds, it doesn't mean you have to take those meds.
 
AlleyCat said:
Even if you felt you could sue your doctor for prescribing off-label meds, it doesn't mean you have to take those meds.
Click to expand...

I beg to differ.

There are circumstances and/or conditions where a person's options for alternative meds is quite limited especially where terminal illness is concerned.
 
Ok, if you feel like you have to take those off-label meds, then why talk about whether it's ok to sue him? Only you can justify your decision to take those meds.
 
Back
Top