Full Text:

(COMMENTARY) SCARED TO DEATH OF LIVING

By Bill Collins

Matthew, Mark, Luke and John,

End this pain, let me pass on;

Doctor will not lend a hand,

And so I need your sturdy band.

I joined the Hemlock Society today. Gave them my credit card number. Told them

to add me to their list, and to send along their instructions for pulling the

plug.

You might want to do the same. The way the Supreme Court is leaning, if you

ever need to get out of your misery, you're going to have to do it by

yourself. Connecticut law won't help. Observers of the court say it's unlikely

the justices will grant us a new constitutional right - the right to have a

doctor help us die.

That's too bad. The court would be a valuable ally. We could use one. Mostly

we have opponents. Take, for example, the legislature in every state,

including ours. The only place with a law allowing doctors to assist in

suicide is Oregon, and that was passed by the people, not lawmakers. And even

that law is not in effect yet, held up on appeal. Should it survive, a new

Oregon Trail may open up, offering a promised land to those presently dying

under degrading conditions. Maybe Dr Kevorkian could even retire.

Help surely seems to be what most Americans want. Polling has shown a strong,

steady increase in public support for allowing doctors to assist pleading

patients to die. In 1947, supporters numbered 37 percent. Now they number 75

percent. No wonder the Oregon referendum passed. No wonder Michigan has never

found a jury willing to convict Kevorkian.

Continuing to resist the public will, though, are some very sturdy opponents.

Best organized are the American Medical Association, the Roman Catholic

Church, right-to-life groups, hospices, and the president of the United

States. Each stands like an arrogant atoll amid a rising tide of human

compassion. Each speaks to values more important to its own way of thinking

than to the relief of human suffering.

Available polling, for example, shows most individual doctors approve of

assisted suicide. As usual it is the institution - the AMA - which lags. That

should not be a surprise. When the golden rule of your profession is to "do no

harm," you can understand how older members might be reluctant to help

patients die. But the majority realizes that often you can do more harm by

keeping someone unwillingly alive.

More surprising are the hospices. They maintain they can fulfill the dying

patient's every need, including dignity. Such balderdash has forced me to

review my own thinking about consigning myself or a family member to the one

in Branford. Surely they can't be so hard up for customers that they would

deny the freedom-to-die to patients seeking a non-hospice option.

The Catholic Church, naturally, has its own rock-hewn doctrine to defend, and

the president, no doubt, his own specialized polls.

Political opposition aside, there is one main policy argument leveled at

assisted suicide. It is often called the "slippery slope." Its adherents

foresee growing use of unfair pressure on the suffering elderly to get them to

opt for death. They envision burned-out families, worn-out doctors, and

tapped-out welfare programs, all urging aged patients to call it quits. Even

ones who aren't ready.

That "slippery slope" is always the last refuge of those lacking solid

arguments. Fortunately the Oregon law carries abundant consultation

requirements to protect unwilling customers. Who would pass a law that didn't?

But the main opposition to assisted suicide is theological, ideological and

political, not rational. Which leads us to the old admonition, "If you don't

like it, don't do it, but don't deprive other people of their right to do it."

Isn't it time for the General Assembly to give us that right?

(The Hemlock Society can be reached at PO Box 101810, Denver, CO 80250-1810.)

(Bill Collins, a former mayor of Norwalk, is a syndicated columnist.)