Washington State Mulls Assisted Suicide Measure

[Judi Lynn]

Source: ABC/Associated Press

Washington State Mulls Assisted Suicide Measure
Emotional battle brewing in Washington state over Oregon-style assisted suicide measure
By RACHEL LA CORTE Associated Press Writer
OLYMPIA, Wash. June 16, 2008 (AP) The Associated Press

There isn't much John Peyton can do on his own except speak, and soon he'll lose even that.

The former Boeing computer programmer has Lou Gehrig's disease, which progressively paralyzes its victims. His doctor gives him three to six months to live.

He is using his last months to oppose a ballot initiative that would allow physicians in Washington state to help terminally ill patients end their lives. Only Oregon has such a law.

"What we're really doing I believe, is attempting to eliminate the sufferer so we don't have to deal with them," Peyton said.

Supporters need to collect about 225,000 valid voter signatures by July 3 to get the "Washington Death with Dignity Initiative" on the November ballot. The campaign has raised more than $1 million, more than enough for a successful signature drive, setting up a fiercely fought and emotional campaign.



Read more: http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/wireStory?id=5174268

[ixion]

1. attempting to eliminate the sufferer?

when the sufferer is pleading for assistance? I beg to differ, sir. This persons courage to press on in the face of the final reckoning is admirable, however, I think his logic is flawed in this regard. If someone wants to orchestrate their own exit, and do so with dignity, what's wrong with that?

[Sal Minella]

2. Intractable pain is apparently not a factor in Lou Gehrig's disease?

People who suffer excruciating pain have a right to decide for themselves whether or not to "eliminate the sufferer," it would seem to me.

The life-or-death decisions of cancer patients should be made by themselves, not by Lou Gehrig's patients or people who don't really even know what pain is, imo.

[KamaAina]

9. Even PAS proponents admit that untreatable pain is not the major factor

in making this decision. The data published by the state of Oregon bear this out. The major factor in making the decision is "loss of dignity", that is, the loss of ability to care for oneself, control over one's bodily functions, etc. In other words, it's a fear of becoming disabled. It's no wonder that many people who live with such disabilities for most of their lives are quite conceerned about PAS.

[pattmarty]

3. This is something that we're going to be hearing about more and more.

[Spouting Horn]

4. On the one hand

Assisted Suicide is "painless", but on the other, lethal injection is "cruel and unusual," because it's painful

Go figure

:eyes:

[Judi Lynn]

5. Identifying donors becomes issue in right-to-die campaign

Monday, June 16, 2008 - Page updated at 12:01 AM
Identifying donors becomes issue in right-to-die campaign
By Carol M. Ostrom

Seattle Times health reporter

Both sides of a voter initiative to legalize physician assistance in dying, likely on track for the fall ballot, have accused the other of attempting to hide the identity of donors and opening the door to out-of-state interests.

Initiative supporters claim that right-to-life group Human Life of Washington wants to influence the election while keeping voters in the dark about the true source of opposition funds, which historically have come from Catholic churches and related organizations.

On the other side, Initiative 1000's official opposition claims that supporters' "sleight of hand" has so obscured the identity of donors that voters wouldn't know if convicted euthanizer Jack Kevorkian had written a check to the campaign.

Each side says arguments made by the other don't meet "the smell test." At stake, they argue, is nothing less than democracy, the people's right to know and freedom of speech.

At the heart of the dispute are the state's public-disclosure laws meant to tell voters who is financing which campaigns. Whether the laws are clear and definitive or confusing and vague depends on the perspective. But one thing is clear: When voters mark their ballots in the fall, they still may not know the primary sources of considerable cash flowing into the I-1000 fight.

More:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2004479209_secretdonors16m.html

[TechBear_Seattle]

6. I don't understand the issue; Washington's disclosure laws are pretty thorough

Public Disclosure Commission

Disclosure reports on I-1000 can be found here.

Washington has some of the most comprehensive disclosure laws in the country.

[Judi Lynn]

7. There's more on this at the end of the article, in case you didn't see it:

Defining exemption

Chris Carlson, chairman of the Coalition Against Assisted Suicide, claims it's the Yes on I-1000 campaign that's trying to hide donors' identities. The campaign "took money from one out-of-state pocket and put it in another to avoid our disclosure laws," he said.

"Even if this turns out to be legal, it smells," Carlson said.

Under Washington law, a group must disclose donors if its primary purpose is to influence an election or if it raises money specifically for that purpose. So Yes on 1000 and the Coalition Against Assisted Suicide must register as political committees and identify their donors.

But a group established for another purpose, using existing money, doesn't have to disclose its donors even when it contributes to a political committee.

Both Death with Dignity National Center and Oregon-based Compassion & Choices say that makes them exempt from identifying their donors.

Death with Dignity National Center says it exists for defense and education of the Oregon Death with Dignity Act, which legalized physician-assistance in dying in that state.

Compassion & Choices is a service, advocacy and educational organization with the aim of "improving care and expanding choice at the end of life," said Lee, Compassion's president. "Campaigns are actually unusual for us."

But Oregon Death with Dignity Political Action Fund, the biggest donor to the Washington campaign, did disclose some donors.

That's because one of that organization's goals is to pass right-to-die legislation in other states, said Peg Sandeen, executive director of both Death with Dignity National Center and Oregon Death with Dignity.

Carlson said the Coalition Against Assisted Suicide has decided not to file an official complaint with the PDC against the right-to-die groups for not identifying all of their donors. Although he believes their reporting violates the "spirit of the law," he said, it appears to have met its letter.

And he noted that his organization is not a party to the Human Life lawsuit. "We support disclosing contributors," he said. "We think the lawsuit was unnecessary."

~~~~~~~~~~
If I see anything beyond this, I'll post it.

[TechBear_Seattle]

8. Ah, ok. Now I got it

It gets tricky when you start dealing with groups removed from the primary sponsors. This is definitely not the first time front groups have been used to disguise contributors to initiative campaigns, but with an issue so emotionally charged, I can see why both sides are making a big deal of this.

[KamaAina]

10. I wouldn't be surprised if the Yes on 1000 money trail leads back to HMOs

HMOs love assisted suicide. A dose of barbiturates is a LOT cheaper than months, perhaps years, of end-of-life care. Indeed, one of the principal authors of the Oregon law was an HMO lobbyist.

[and-justice-for-all]

11. What gives these folks the right to decided for everyone?!

This is bullshit, if I am suffering and I want to call it a day, that is my choice. If this dude wants to carry on the way he is, great! have at it mate.