This week, Gov. Peter Shumlin made Vermont the fourth state in the nation to legalize doctor-assisted suicide, a move that follows more than a decade of fierce debate in a state grounded in progressive policies.
There are some stipulations to the new law, including a provision requiring those eligible for the medication to be over the age of 18. Patients must also be residents of Vermont and must have six or fewer months to live.
It’s a victory for those who have battled for the cause, ushering in Vermont as another state to endorse the “death with dignity” argument, a contentious topic mirroring the arguments that surround abortion.
“Professional practice standards guide all of medicine and it is appropriate for aid in dying to be governed in this manner,” Barbara Coombs Lee, president of the advocacy organization Compassion and Choices, said in a press release.
Yet not everyone believes the new law is a progressive medical achievement, including those in the anti-abortion movement who see it as a symptom of a culture in decline.
“There is nothing medical about it. Just because drugs are being used, it’s morally no different than putting a fist full in your mouth,” Pro-Life Action League Executive Director Eric Scheidler told Mint Press News.
Targeting the vulnerable … or providing options?
“This historic legislative victory proves that the aid-in-dying issue is no longer the third rail of politics,” Coombs Lee said. “In fact, it’s a winning issue on which Gov. Shumlin campaigned.”
Coombs Lee sees the bill’s passage, after a decade of debate, as a reflection of shifting public opinion — in the right direction. Recent polls back up her optimism.
Vermont Alliance for Ethical Healthcare, an organization opposed to the legislation, released a poll in April designed to cast doubt on public support for doctor-assisted suicide. However, the survey indicated that a solid majority of Vermont residents backed a law that would make it easier for terminally ill patients to take their own lives. Only about one-third of Vermonters opposed any change in the law.
Separately, Vermont media outlet WCAX released a poll in May indicating 72 percent supported the legislation, with just 20 percent in opposition.
Scheidler is a staunch opponent to any legislation that allows doctors to assist in what he sees as suicide, yet he says he understands the argument by those who favor the legislation.
“I have a great deal of compassion for people who are suffering. I’ve had family members whose end of lives were very painful,” he said, speaking to the argument that patients have the right to choose to end their lives in a time of pain and suffering.
Yet to Scheidler, that argument doesn’t override his dedication to choosing life at all costs, and promoting that viewpoint within society’s legal realm.
“In principle, as a first principle, to take someone’s life or to help someone take their own life is simply wrong,” he said, adding that the country’s most vulnerable patients will become victims of exploitation.
Scheidler sees the legislation as a slippery slope that would allow vulnerable patients — those without family or financial means — to be pressured to choose death as a medical option. He views the Vermont legislation as “elitist” and worries that insurance companies will recognize lethal medication as a viable, cost-saving option for patient treatment.
A sweeping movement?
The three other states that have approved right-to-die measures have done so either through referendum or court precedent. Voters in Oregon approved a referendum in 1997. In 2006, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the Oregon voters’ decision, ruling 6-3 in favor of the Death with Dignity Act. The ruling opened the doors for Washington residents to follow in the footsteps of Oregon.
Washington passed its right-to-die bill in 2009 through a referendum.
Doctor-assisted suicide was made legal in Montana through an unpopular 2009 state supreme court decision, Baxter v. Montana. Retired veteran and longtime truck driver Robert Baxter was suffering from a terminal condition of lymphocytic leukemia. Along with Compassion and Choices, he filed suit arguing his right to die with dignity was guaranteed under the state constitution.
In a move opposite to Vermont’s, Montana legislators this year attempted to undo the court’s decision through HB 505, a bill that would have criminalized doctors with up to 10 years in prison for assisting in the death of a terminally ill patient. The bill was tabled.
In November, voters in Massachusetts turned down a referendum that would have allowed doctors to prescribe lethal medication to patients.
Now that Vermont has legalized physician-assisted suicide, lawmakers in Connecticut and New Jersey are flirting with similar bills, calling into question whether a practice that has long been illegal could emerge as a new bipartisan issue.
“I think this is one of those issues that really is up for grabs,” Scheidler said. “I think people are making the case on both sides that is compelling.”