EPC-USA Disability Rights Opposition New Hampshire to Assisted Suicide Bill HB1283.

Dear Senator

Meghan Schrader

EPC-USA's Fact Sheet is testimony regarding the social harms attached to assisted suicide legislation like HB1283. However, given that assisted suicide’s negative impact is going to fall primarily on the disabled community, the EPC felt that we should submit a more detailed analysis of how assisted suicide undermines disability rights, and whose advice on this matter ought to be heeded by members of the Assembly.

Members of the EPC board with training in the fields of disability studies and advocacy have noted that some assisted suicide advocates are trying to hijack disability rights for their own purposes. For instance, an able-bodied man named Christopher Riddle has done pro-assisted suicide advocacy in the Northeast while presenting himself as a “disability rights advocate.” Riddle is a colleague of Udo Schuklenk, one of the architects of Canada’s euthanasia program, and Riddle enthusiastically approves of that program.

Moreover, Riddle’s theories about disability rights have been reasonably criticized as lacking any empirical grounding in the experiences of disabled people. He has no experience or personal stake in the practical implications of his ideas.

Furthermore, Riddle’s scholarship dehumanizes disabled people who are harmed by assisted suicide; he frames anyone who might be harmed by assisted suicide as the equivalent of a car accident statistic. He asserts that harm that assisted suicide might cause for people with disabilities “ought not to be of special concern.” Hence, Riddle is willing to sacrifice people with disabilities for the right to die movement’s agenda; he is not the “disability rights advocate” he claims to be.

For a more accurate understanding of how the disabled community has approached the issue of assisted suicide, we encourage you to watch a video created by disability studies ethicist Harold Braswell about disability rights opposition to assisted suicide. Braswell has studied the right to die issue extensively.

There are other very important facts that legislators must take into account when considering how assisted suicide is impacting the disabled community:

The American Association of Suicidology made a 2017 statement saying that “MAiD” was not suicide. But in 2023 the AAS had to retract that statement because it was used in the 2019 Truchon decision that expanded assisted suicide to disabled Canadians, which was opposed by the Canadian Association for Suicide Prevention.The consequences of the AAS’s statement are an example of how green lighting assisted suicide for the terminally ill easily results in violence against people with disabilities.

In 2021, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Rights of People with Disabilities asserted that all assisted suicide laws violate its Convention On The Rights of People with Disabilities.

Peer-reviewed research establishes that people are more likely to view suicide as acceptable if the victim is disabled, and people with disabilities often lack access to comprehensive suicide prevention care. This bill exacerbates that problem by laying the scaffolding for “MAiD” to become a substitute for the suicides of persons with disabilities.

Well-known right to die leader Thaddeus Mason Pope has tweeted that it’s good for disabled people to die by suicide; the director of Compassion and Choices appeared on Dr. Phil with Pope in 2023. If you pass this bill, you empower and reward a contingent of people who want disabled people’s suicides to be a “medical procedure.”

We urge you to allow HB1283 to die this session because regardless of its content, it rewards a movement that is hostile to people with disabilities. Exacerbating the oppression that disabled people already face so that the proponents can plan their deaths is unwise and unjust.

Sincerely,

Meghan Schrader, Disability Rights EPC-USA
Josephine L.A. Glaser, MD.,FAAFP
Colleen E. Barry, Chairperson
Kenneth Stevens, MD
William Toffler, MD
Gordon Friesen
Alex Schadenberg
Epc_USA@yahoo.com

Endnotes

1. https://twitter.com/cariddlephd/status/1373071051631038470
2. http://www.lpbr.net/2014/08/disability-and-justice-capabilities.html?m=1
3. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09687599.2014.984931
4. https://philpapers.org/rec/RIDAD
5. https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/vdpwdt26wwq42ak0eraee/Braswell_PAS-Statement_To-Send-1.mov?rlkey=05vve2sis2s4sy51hma27jx2u&dl=0
6. https://www.slu.edu/arts-and-sciences/bioethics/faculty/braswell-harold.php
7. https://suicidology.org/2023/03/08/aas-update-on-previous-statement/
8. https://twitter.com/TrudoLemmens/status/1666067817035190272
9. https://suicideprevention.ca/media/statement-on-recent-maid-developments/
10. https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2021/01/disability-not-reason-sanction-medically-assisted-dying-un-experts
11. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26402344/
12. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XXVrgtTNN2Y&t=2108s
13. https://twitter.com/ThaddeusPope/status/1669450726831976449

EPC-USA Disability Rights Statement in STRONG OPPOSITION to New York Assisted Suicide Bill

Dear Members of the New York Assembly:

The EPC-USA has already submitted testimony regarding the social harms attached to assisted suicide legislation like A995A. However, given that assisted suicide’s negative impact is going to fall primarily on the disabled community, the EPC felt that we should submit a more detailed analysis of how assisted suicide undermines disability rights, and whose advice on this matter ought to be heeded by members of the Assembly.

Members of the EPC board with training in the fields of disability studies and advocacy have noted that some assisted suicide advocates are trying to hijack disability rights for their own purposes. For instance, an able-bodied man named Christopher Riddle has done pro-assisted suicide advocacy in New York while presenting himself as a “disability rights advocate.” Riddle is a colleague of Udo Schuklenk, one of the architects of Canada’s euthanasia program, and Riddle enthusiastically approves of that program.

Moreover, Riddle’s theories about disability rights have been reasonably criticized as lacking any empirical grounding in the experiences of disabled people. He has no experience or personal stake in the practical implications of his ideas.

Furthermore, Riddle’s scholarship dehumanizes disabled people who are harmed by assisted suicide; he frames anyone who might be harmed by assisted suicide as the equivalent of a car accident statistic. He asserts that harm that assisted suicide might cause for people with disabilities “ought not to be of special concern.” Hence, Riddle is willing to sacrifice people with disabilities for the right to die movement’s agenda; he is not the “disability rights advocate” he claims to be.

For a more accurate understanding of how the disabled community has approached the issue of assisted suicide, we encourage you to watch a video created by disability studies ethicist Harold Braswell about disability rights opposition to assisted suicide. Braswell has studied the right to die issue extensively.

There are other very important facts that legislators must take into account when considering how assisted suicide is impacting the disabled community:

The American Association of Suicidology made a 2017 statement saying that “MAiD” was not suicide. But in 2023 the AAS had to retract that statement because it was used in the 2019 Truchon decision that expanded assisted suicide to disabled Canadians, which was opposed by the Canadian Association for Suicide Prevention.The consequences of the AAS’s statement are an example of how green lighting assisted suicide for the terminally ill easily results in violence against people with disabilities.

In 2021, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Rights of People with Disabilities asserted that all assisted suicide laws violate its Convention On The Rights of People with Disabilities.

Peer-reviewed research establishes that people are more likely to view suicide as acceptable if the victim is disabled, and people with disabilities often lack access to comprehensive suicide prevention care. This bill exacerbates that problem by laying the scaffolding for “MAiD” to become a substitute for the suicides of persons with disabilities.

Well-known right to die leader Thaddeus Mason Pope has tweeted that it’s good for disabled people to die by suicide; the director of Compassion and Choices appeared on Dr. Phil with Pope in 2023. If you pass this bill, you empower and reward a contingent of people who want disabled people’s suicides to be a “medical procedure.”

We urge you to allow A995A to die this session because regardless of its content, it rewards a movement that is hostile to people with disabilities. Exacerbating the oppression that disabled people already face so that the proponents can plan their deaths is unwise and unjust.

Sincerely,

Meghan Schrader, Disability Rights EPC-USA

Josephine L.A. Glaser, MD.,FAAFP

Colleen E. Barry, Chairperson

Kenneth Stevens, MD

William Toffler, MD

Gordon Friesen

Alex Schadenberg

Letter to New York Legislators opposing assisted suicide Bill S.2445.

Euthanasia Prevention Coalition-USA Statement in STRONG OPPOSITION to S.2445: Assisted Suicide–also known as “Medical Aid in Dying” 

Dear Senator:

Please let S.2445 die this session. Assisted suicide laws disguised as legally contrived, confusing, and euphemistic term, "medical aid in dying" is not healthcare. Assisted suicide proponents are trying to sell you a "pig in a poke." It's not about pain or a quick, peaceful death. It spawns more suicides and provides less healthcare. EPC-USA's physicians and disability advocates express strong opposition to assisted suicide.

The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition USA supports public policy that promotes positive measures to improve the quality of life of people living with a terminal illness and their families; we oppose euthanasia and assisted suicide. We are aging and disability advocates, lawyers, doctors, nurses and politicians.

Any safeguards are part of a deliberate bait and switch tactic by assisted suicide advocates to get a bill passed and then come back to amend it by gutting those safeguards. This was openly acknowledged by J.M. Sorrell, Executive Director of Massachusetts Death with Dignity, who was quoted on a similar bill saying, “Once you get something passed, you can always work on amendments later.” (Link) Oregon, Washington, California, Vermont, Hawaii, and New Mexico all have provisions that dramatically waive safeguards. 

This incremental strategy to promote legal and social acceptance of assisted suicide in the U.S. state by state since 1997 is confirmed by the Compassion & Choices (Link) strategic plan. 

It’s Not about Pain  

“I’m often asked if I want people to die in pain. You probably have been asked that question, too.” Dr. Lonny Shavelson, a California assisted suicide provider says promoting “aid in dying” as avoiding pain is a political sales pitch. See webinar minutes 25:24-27:53. He says people choose assisted suicide because they are low energy or afraid of losing control.  A Review of Oregon’s assisted dying law finds significant data gaps (Link). The review revealed that information on clinical complications is often missing, while key information on the factors behind medical decision-making, the effectiveness of the lethal drugs used, and the extent of palliative care support is not collected.

It’s Not about a Peaceful or Quick Death 

Dr. Shavelson says the idea that assisted suicide creates a peaceful beautiful death is another myth. See webinar minutes 37:35-41:00. 

No amount of bill language can change the fact that some people will suffer prolonged and agonizing deaths from the experimental lethal drug cocktails, with some regaining consciousness only to die of their terminal illness. Medical science cannot guarantee the peaceful death proponents claim. If lethal injections administered for capital punishment have resulted in inhumane deaths, oral ingestion of lethal drug compounds is far more likely to do so.

Assisted Suicide Spawns More Suicides and Attempted Suicides.

Assisted suicide laws send a message that suicide is an acceptable way to solve problems. Publicity about suicide also leads to more suicides. This is called suicide contagion. A special concern with NY High School students, as discussed in an article on Centers for Latina Girls.

Legalization of Assisted Suicide also impacts youths suicide. A 2019 report found teen suicides in California increased by 34% (Link) since that state legalized Assisted Suicide in 2016. Oregon’s youth suicides increased 79.3% from 2000 to 2018. Research about completed suicides in four states that legalized Assisted Suicide (Oregon, Washington, Vermont and Montana) found it was associated at least a 6.3% increase in the rate of all suicide deaths (Link).

Insurance Companies Use Assisted Suicide to Deny Curative Life-Saving Treatment

Insurers stop covering certain treatments due to the availability of Assisted Suicide. Dr. Brian Callister (Link) of Nevada says he was stunned when insurance would not cover life saving treatment for his patients who were transferring to California and Oregon, but offered to pay for Assisted Suicide instead. These were people who could be cured with the denied treatment (Link) rather than being rendered terminal. (Link) In effect, Assisted Suicide is used to shunt people off the curative, restorative medicine track, especially if they cannot afford to pay for treatments out of pocket.  

People of color understand this will be used to provide them poorer care. 

Even with insurance, people of color get poorer hospital care and pain relief. According to a New York Times (Link) article, people of color disproportionately died of COVID-19. So, it is unsurprising Black and Latinx people oppose Assisted Suicide by 2-1 margins. (Link) ... the voting results from Ballot Question 2 in 2012 show Assisted Suicide pits wealthier, whiter districts against those with poorer people of color according to Second Thoughts - Massachusetts.

EPC-USA's physicians remind us that Assisted Suicide laws exacerabate systematic inequalities that disabled people experience with respect to suicide prevention. A "Federal study found that the nation's assisted suicide laws are rife with dangers to people with disabilities" (Link)

EPC-USA’s physicians remind us that Physicians are fallible. Misdiagnoses and unreliable terminal prognoses are documented in at least three cases: Jeanette hall (Link), John Norton, (Link) and Rahamim Melamed an Rahamim Mlamed-Cohen (Link).

In 2023, American Association of Suicidology (AAS) national organizations recognized their mistake and retracted their support for assisted suicide and its legally constructed term“MAiD”:

In 2017, the American Association of Suicidology (AAS) published their statement that “MAiD” was not suicide. In 2023, the AAS retracted their 2017 statement because their 2017 statement was used by assisted suicide advocates in the 2019 Truchon decision that expanded assisted suicide to disabled Canadians. The Canadian Association for Suicide Prevention opposes the expansion of MAiD legislation to include mental illness.

EPC-USA’s Disability Rights Advocates remind us Assisted Suicide for the terminally ill very clearly normalizes discussions about whether it might be ok to help disabled people die by suicide. Without realizing it we can be blind to the reality that supporting Assisted Suicide individually and corporately is an example of ableism and perpetuates systemic racism for the poor, disabled, lonely, vulnerable and marginalized young and elderly individuals.

Highly educated advocates for assisted suicide laws like Christopher Riddler and Udo Schuklenk are known for their assisted suicide advocacy in New York and Canada while misrepresenting themselves as a "disability rights advocates" Their philosophy blinds NY legislators in the reality of their ableist philosophy. 

No change in language alters the fact that offering suicide prevention to most people while offering suicide assistance (legally constructed as “medical aid in dying”) to an ever-widening subset of disabled people undermines disability rights and perpetuates lethal disability discrimination. Passing an assisted suicide law in New York is unwise and unjust.

 As the cheapest state-sponsored “treatment,” assisted suicide diminishes patient choice and takes away patient autonomy of the most vulnerable. Assisted suicide combined with a broken health care and home care system is a deadly mix for people who are economically poor, lonely, vulnerable, elderly, disabled, and historically marginalized in the US healthcare system. 

Advocates of assisted suicide assert that there has never been one case of abuse related to laws legalizing assisted suicide under the legally constructed and euphemistic term "medical aid in dying." Setting aside the inherent flaw of making such a broad assertion, the Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund (DREDF) has catalogued a long list of abuse cases (Link).

We urge you to oppose policies that provide legal immunity to assisted suicide providers and allow them to use their medical license to legally harm / kill patients who are not yet at death's door by prescribing them lethal drugs.

We urge you to allow S.2445 to die this session - a harmful, dangerous and deadly assisted suicide law.

Sincerely, 

Colleen E. Barry, Chairperson 347-245-9476

Josephine L.A. Glaser, MD.,FAAFP

Kenneth Stevens, MD

William Toffler, MD

Gordon Friesen

Alex Schadenberg

Euthanasia Prevention Coalition USA

Epc_USA@yahoo.com

Dr Josephine Glaser: Response to George Will's support for assisted suicide

Regarding George F. Will’s Jan. 21 op-ed about assisted suicide laws.

Dr Josephine Glaser

Josephine L. A. Glaser, MD, FAAFP

Director Euthanasia Prevention Coalition-USA

Mr. Will’s article has an emotional appeal favoring medical aid in dying, a pleasant sounding name for physician assisted suicide at end of life. I also got the sense that Mr. Will was attempting to move the opinion of the US public and legislators toward favoring euthanasia. Currently, our northern neighbors legally allow their doctors and clinicians to not just prescribe lethal injections, but also administer them to patients, thereby killing patients by lethal injections. This is diametrically opposed to the National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization standard of palliative and hospice care. In addition, the Center to Advance Palliative Care is a vibrant network of health care professionals at over 1,700 organizations that train staff of all specialties and disciplines in communication, pain and symptom management, and other key skills to improve the care of people living with a serious or incurable illness.

I am a Board Certified Family Medicine physician specialist with over 26 years experience in the art and science of womb-to-tomb care for individuals, families, and communities. My physician mentors taught me the way of palliative and hospice care as founded and practiced by Dame Cicely Saunders. Physicians, allied healthcare professionals, and healthcare systems should continue to help people who are living with incurable diseases or are imminently dying to live as well as they can until their natural death. Most physicians seek to relieve symptoms with medical aids for patients who are living with a terminal diagnosis or imminently dying of a terminal illness. Legislators serve their constituents by protecting the lives of vulnerable individuals and holding doctors and healthcare systems accountable to living up to the ideals of a doctor as healer and helper: “As to diseases, make a habit of two things—to help, or at least to do no harm.” Hippocrates 460-357 BC

This fundamental truth is what is overlooked, minimized, disparaged, conflated or ignored in all Death with Dignity bills. In 2003, assisted suicide advocates ran a succesful messaging campaign. “Medical aid in dying” replaced physician (and now clinician) assisted suicide so as to make the idea and act more palatable to the public and legislative bodies. Assisted suicide advocates did the same by changing the organization’s name from Hemlock Society to Compassion and Choices. When legislators and the public are persuaded by heavily funded assisted suicide advocates to pass public policy allowing doctors and clinicians to legally hasten or accelerate the death of individuals (beware: removal of safeguards) by prescribing off-label use of lethal doses of medications and market that as “medical aid in dying” and a “peaceful death,” then the poor, the vulnerable, the forgotten, and the impaired are at greatest risk of unwanted accelerated death. It is my medical opinion that Physicians, clinicians, pharmacists, and healthcare systems who support assisted suicide are providing false compassion and sub-standard palliative & hospice care. Best practice palliative and hospice care involves physician led and individualized care coordination with medications for pain, shortness of breath and agitation. There is skin care and personal care. There is emotional, psychosocial, and spiritual care. The best practice standard of palliative and hospice care is natural death which is a death with dignity.