California doctors receive a settlement in conscience rights victory.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

I reported on September 7, 2022, that U.S. District Judge Fernando Aenlle-Rocha ruled that California Senate Bill 380, which amended the End of Life Option Act (assisted suicide law) in California, violated the First Amendment rights of doctors by requiring them to participate in assisted suicide. Aenlle-Rocha granted a preliminary injunction barring the state from compelling health care providers to document a patient’s request for assisted suicide.

Last week, the California government decided not to appeal the decision and to pay $300,000 to the Alliance Defending Freedom, a legal non-profit group that represented the physicians in the case.

Bob Egelko reported for the San Francisco Chronicle that:

Rather than appealing Aenlle-Rocha’s ruling, state officials agreed Wednesday not to enforce the recording and referral requirements against objecting physicians, and also agreed to pay the physicians’ group $300,000 for attorneys’ fees and legal costs.

Egelko quoted Kevin Theriot of Alliance Defending Freedom as stating:

“This is a significant victory for religious and conscientious physicians in California,”

“The government can’t force any health care professional to act against his faith or medical ethics.”

An article by Mimi Nguyen Ly that was published by the Epoch Times concerning the September 2022 court decision explained that SB 380 required a doctor who opposes assisted suicide to document a request for assisted suicide and that request was considered the first of the two required legal requests. Therefore doctors who oppose assisted suicide were being required to participate in the assisted suicide approval process. Judge Aenlle-Rocha agreed that the law required doctors who oppose assisted suicide to participate in the law. Nguyen Ly reported:

Aenlle-Rocha noted in his ruling on Sept. 2: “The ultimate outcome of this requirement is that non-participating providers are compelled to participate in the Act through this documentation requirement, despite their objections to assisted suicide.

The judge wrote that the Christian doctors “have demonstrated they are likely to suffer a violation of a constitutional right absent an injunction,” and have established that “they are likely to succeed on their Free Speech claim” because the documentation requirement under SB 380 “exceeds merely managing medical records—it imposes an affirmative documentation requirement.”

A similar conscience rights case was recently settled in New Mexico, when the New Mexico government passed a law removing the requirement for doctors who oppose assisted suicide to participate in the assisted suicide approval process.

Minnesota assisted suicide bills provide legal immunity to kill.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition.

The Minnesota legislature will be debating companion assisted suicide bills HF 1930 and SF 1813.

For many years I have writen about assisted suicide and the language of the assisted suicide bills. In 2021, New Mexico passed the most extreme assisted suicide bill in America. Minnesota's assisted suicide bills contains some of the measures that are found in the New Mexico law. 

"To learn more about the status of this bill and what you can do to stop assisted suicide, visit www.ethicalcaremn.org and take action."

The Minnesota assisted suicide bill is more permissive than the Oregon assisted suicide law. The bills:

• Allows non physicians to assess, approve and prescribe lethal assisted suicide drugs. Minnesota defines a "Provider" as: a doctor of medicine or osteopathy, and an advanced practice registered nurse. 
• Allows lesser trained mental health professionals to assess competency. "Licensed mental health provider" is defined as a psychiatrist, psychologist, clinical social worker, psychiatric nurse practitioner, or clinical professional counselor. 
• There is no waiting period for being approved for assisted suicide. It is possible that a person request assisted suicide and die the same day.
  
• Allows the lethal drug cocktail to be delivered by mail or messenger service. 
• Allows a healthcare facility to prohibit assisted suicide but the facility cannot prohibit information about assisted suicide or referrals for assisted suicide.
• Does not require the person requesting death by lethal drugs to be a resident of Minnesota. Oregon withdrew their residency requirement in 2022. There is now an assisted suicide clinic and suicide tourists in Oregon. 
• Creates a "standard of care" for assisted suicide, Medical care that complies with the requirements of this section meets the medical standard of care. Assisted suicide is not medical care.
  

The Minnesota bills requires that assisted suicide not be listed as the cause of death on the death certificate. The bills states:

When a death has occurred in accordance with section 145.871, the death shall be attributed to the underlying terminal disease.

Further to that, a death by assisted suicide cannot be designated as a suicide or homicide. The bills states:

Death in accordance with section 145.871 shall not be designated suicide or homicide.

This is significant because when a person dies by assisted suicide, sometimes the person was administered the lethal drug cocktail rather than it being "self administered." The bill states that it shall not be designated a homicide.

The Minnesota assisted suicide bills provides complete legal immunity for "Providers" who are willing to prescribe lethal drugs. The bills states:

• No person or health care facility shall be subject to civil or criminal liability or professional disciplinary action, including censure, suspension, loss of license, loss of privileges, loss of membership, or any other penalty for engaging in good faith compliance.

Good faith compliance is the lowest standard.

The bills end by providing more legal protection for those who participate in assisted suicide. The bills states:

(a) Nothing in sections 145.871 to 145.878 authorizes a provider or any other person, including the qualified individual, to end the qualified individual's life by lethal injection, lethal infusion, mercy killing, homicide, murder, manslaughter, euthanasia, or any other criminal act.

(b) Actions taken in accordance with sections 145.871 to 145.878 do not, for any purposes, constitute suicide, assisted suicide, euthanasia, mercy killing, homicide, murder, manslaughter, elder abuse or neglect, or any other civil or criminal violation under the law.

Section (a) states that the bill does not authorize a person to kill by lethal injection... but it doesn't prohibit it either. Section B states that actions in accordance with... do not, for any purposes, constitute... In other words, if the lethal drug cocktail was used to kill the person, the law states that it is not euthanasia, mercy killing, homicide, murder, manslaughter, elder abuse or neglect...

The immunity that these bills provide the "Providers" who assess, approve and prescribe lethal drug cocktails, should cause concern for every legislator and lead them to reject the bill.

The wording of the bills ensures that no one who participates in assisted suicide will ever be subject to any civil or criminal liability. Let's be clear, when the family of a person who dies by assisted suicide have a strong case that something very wrong occurred, the family will not achieve justice because the law grants complete immunity.

New Mexico doctors launch court case for conscience rights

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

A New Mexico doctor has launched a court case to protect the conscience rights of physicians who oppose assisted suicide. New Mexico legalized assisted suicide in 2021 by passing of Bill HB 47 with the law caming into effect on June 18, 2021. The New Mexico assisted suicide law forces doctors who oppose assisted suicide to be complicit in the act.

The conscience right case was launched by Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) on behalf of Dr Mark Lacy and the Christian Medical Dental Society on December 13, 2022.

The legal complaint states:

The Act purports to protect physicians who object to assisted suicide for reasons of conscience, saying they will not be required to “participate.” But that promise rings hollow. The Act does not define the word “participate,” requires conscientious objectors to facilitate suicide in material ways, and expressly prohibits professional associations like CMDA from taking action to ensure that their members advance—rather than undermine—their mission and message.

The Act compels objecting physicians to speak and inform terminally ill patients about the availability of assisted suicide. N.M. STAT. ANN. § 24-7C-6.

The Act forces objecting physicians to refer their patients to physicians or organizations who are “able and willing to carry out” the patient’s assisted suicide. N.M. STAT. ANN. § 24-7C-7(C).

The State of New Mexico thus compels objecting health care professionals to speak a certain message about assisted suicide, and forces them to provide proximate, formal, and material cooperation in an unethical ...act.

If physicians refuse to inform patients about assisted suicide or refuse to refer patients to providers and entities who are able and willing to participate, they violate the Act and face substantial civil, administrative, and professional liability. They also risk losing their medical licenses.

In other words, the New Mexico assisted suicide law requires doctors to provide information and to refer patients to physicians or organizations who are willing to assist suicides. These requirements violate the conscience rights of physicians.

On February 28, 2022 a similar conscience rights court case was filed in a California court by a group of Doctors who oppose assisted suicide. The California legislature had passed assisted suicide expansion bill SB 380 which forced doctors who oppose assisted suicide to be complicit in the act.

In September 2022, U.S. District Judge Fernando Aenlle-Rocha from the Central District of California ruled that California SB 380 violates the First Amendment rights of doctors by requiring them to participate in assisted suicide.

Aenlle-Rocha also granted a preliminary injunction barring the state from compelling health care providers to document a patient’s request for assisted suicide.

The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition and EPC-USA hope that a similar decision will be made in New Mexico to protect the conscience rights of physicians who oppose intentionally ending patients lives by assisted suicide.

Kentucky Assisted Suicide bill uses expansive definitions.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Kentucky legislature.

One of my predictions that I published on January 5 was that most of the new assisted suicide bills would use the expansive definitions found in the New Mexico assisted suicide law. The New Mexico assisted suicide law is the most extreme in America.

Kentucky assisted suicide bill (HB 149) is clearly based on the New Mexico law. Even though Kentuck is unlikely to legalize assisted suicide, the assisted suicide lobby have introduced a more expansive bill than the Oregon law.

Even though we are talking about giving someone a lethal assisted suicide drug cocktail and death is irrevocable:

1. HB 149 uses the term "Health care provider" rather than the term physician. Health care provider includes: a doctor of medicine, a doctor of osteopathy, an advanced practice registered nurse and a physician assistant. Therefore nurses and physician assistants can be involved with assessing and prescribing lethal drug cocktails. Similar to the New Mexico law, providing a wider definition of who can participate in assisted suicide deals with the reality that very few doctors will do assisted suicide.
   
2. HB 149 maintains the 15 day waiting period but it allows the health care provider to wave the 15 day waiting period if it is determined that the person may have less than 15 days to live. Based on this definition, HB 149 allows for a same day death.
3. HB 149 allows delivery of the lethal drug cocktail by mail.
4. HB 149 tramples on the conscience rights of health care providers who oppose assisted suicide. The bill does not require health care providers to directly participate in assisted suicide but it states that "the failure to provide information about medical aid in dying to a qualified individual who requests it or failure to refer the qualified individual ... shall be considered a failure to obtain informed consent...
5. HB 149 tramples on the rights of health care facilities that oppose assisted suicide. The bill does not require health care facilities to permit assisted suicide but it prohibits health care facilities from preventing health care providers from providing informed consent and meeting the standards of care. The term informed consent means providing all information about assisted suicide.
   

Similar to all assisted suicide bills, HB 149 requires the health care provider to only fulfill a "good faith compliance." Therefore a health care provider who prescribed an assisted suicide drug cocktail in "good faith" has no fear of being "subject to civil or criminal liability or professional disciplinary action, including censure, suspension, loss of license, loss of privileges, loss of membership, or any other penalty".

Assisted suicide bills are not about freedom of choice but rather these bills are assisted suicide provider protection bills.

The US assisted suicide lobby plans for expanding assisted suicide laws.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

For the past several years I have been writing about the assisted suicide lobby plans to expand assisted suicide in America. 

The US assisted suicide lobby is expanding assisted suicide laws by: eliminating waiting periods, eliminating the 6 month terminal prognosis, allowing nurses and other medical providers to approve and participate in assisted suicide, eliminating residency requirements, and expanding assisted suicide laws to allow euthanasia (death by lethal injection rather than lethal prescription).

Recently, a long time assisted suicide lobby leader expressed these changes as Medical Aid in Dying 3.0. He described the original Oregon and Washington State assisted suicide laws as Medical Aid in Dying 1.0. He then refers to the recent expansions of assisted suicide laws as Medical Aid in Dying 2.0. He then describes the recent court cases to further expand assisted suicide to euthanasia and then nationally as Medical Aid in Dying 3.0.

Medical Aid in Dying 2.0?

The first set of assisted suicide expansions included eliminating the 15-day waiting period and expanding who can prescribe and carry-out an assisted suicide death.

In July 2019 Oregon Governor Kate Brown expanded the assisted suicide law by signing Bill SB 0579 into law. This bill, essentially, eliminates the 15 day waiting period to die by assisted suicide, a safeguard that was mean't to assure that a person has an opportunity to change their mind.

Proponents of the bill argued that the bill only applies to people with less than 15 days to live, and yet, it is difficult to know when someone has less than 15 days to live.

This year, New Mexico passed assisted suicide Bill HB 47 further codifying the assisted suicide lobby's expansion plans. HB 47 did not require a 15 day waiting period but only required a 48 hour waiting period that can be waived if the health care provider believes that the person may be imminently dying. Therefore HB 47 technically allows a same day death.

New Mexico also expanded who could prescribe and participate in assisted suicide. HB 47 allowed non-physicians defined as "health care providers" to approve and prescribe lethal drugs. "Health care providers" includes physicians, licensed physician assistants, osteopathic physicians, or nurses registered in advanced practice. The assisted suicide lobby is expanding who can prescribe and participate since very few physicians are willing to assist a suicide.

Recently California passed assisted suicide expansion Bill SB 380, which among other things, allowed the waiting period to be waived when a person is nearing death.

Medical Aid in Dying 3.0?

In August I reported that the assisted death lobby is supporting a court case to expand assisted suicide to euthanasia in California. The case argues that some people with disabilities are unable to self-administer the lethal assisted suicide drugs. Therefore, based on the Americans with Disabilities Act, the court is being asked to permit euthanasia (doctor administered death) in these cases.

In September a California judge rejected a preliminary injunction to permit the plaintiffs in the case to die by euthanasia before the actual trial is heard. The court case continues but the plaintiffs cannot die by lethal injection before the court decision is final.

Permitting euthanasia is not an extension of the state assisted suicide law but rather it would require the court to legislate a new law, that being legalizing euthanasia, which is a form of homicide. 

The assisted suicide lobby is trying to legalize euthanasia via the court because they recognize that elected officials are not willing to legalize euthanasia by creating an exception to homicide in the law.

Since the inception of the first US assisted suicide law in the state of Oregon, the assisted suicide lobby has been trying to extend assisted suicide to all 50 US states. 

Last year I wrote about the attempt by the assisted suicide lobby to use Covid 19 guidelines to permit assisted suicide by telehealth (Link to the article). Assisted suicide by telehealth may extend approvals for assisted suicide to all 50 US states.

In late October, an assisted suicide lobby group, and Dr Nicholas Gideones, a doctor who prescribes assisted suicide drug cocktails, launched a court case to challenge the Oregon assisted suicide law residency requirement. The lawsuit has been filed in the federal court, claims that the residency requirement is unconstitutional.

If the assisted suicide lobby and Dr Gideones win their legal challenge to the Oregon state residency requirement then the Oregon assisted suicide law would apply to every American. This court case directly affects every state that protects people from assisted suicide.

I predict that the assisted suicide lobby will launch a few more court cases within the next year with the hope of further expanding assisted suicide in the US. One case might be to challenge the 6 month prognosis requirement while another might attempt to have assisted suicide defined as medical treatment.

This article only creates awareness. What is needed is a greater effort to expose and stop the expansion of assisted suicide in America.

Nevada assisted suicide bill denies equal protection under the law.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

When legislators vote on assisted suicide bills they often vote based on the theory of legalizing assisted suicide and not the reality of the bill that they are considering. A prime example is the recent passing of the New Mexico assisted suicide bill that was one of the most extreme and dangerous assisted suicide bills.

The Nevada State Legislature is debating assisted suicide Bill AB 351. AB 351 is similar to the Oregon and Washington State assisted suicide laws.

There are several hidden factors within this and other assisted suicide bills that lead me to wonder what the assisted suicide lobby is trying to cover-up. For instance, AB 351 forbids a coroner from investigating an assisted suicide death. AB 351 states:

Section 1: Chapter 440 of NRS is hereby amended by adding thereto a new section to read as follows:

1. A coroner, coroner’s deputy or local health officer:
(a) Is not required to certify the cause of death of a patient who dies after self-administering a medication that is designed to end the life of the patient in accordance with the provisions of sections 5 to 30, inclusive, of this act; and

(b) Must not investigate the death of a patient who dies after self-administering a medication that is designed to end the life of the patient in accordance with the provisions of sections 5 to 30, inclusive, of this act if the coroner or coroner’s deputy confirms the circumstances of the death with a physician responsible for overseeing the care of the patient or the physician who prescribed the medication.

This bill provision denies equal protection under the law for people who are prescribed lethal assisted suicide drugs. 

AB 351 requires doctors to lie on the death certificate. AB 351 states:

3.The medical certificate of death of a patient who dies after self-administering a medication that is designed to end the life of the patient in accordance with sections 5 to 30, inclusive, of this act:

(a) May be signed by the physician who prescribed the medication or the operator of a facility for hospice care, as defined in NRS 449.0033, at which the patient dies;

(b) Must specify the terminal condition with which the patient was diagnosed as the cause of death; and

(c) Must not mention that the patient self-administered a medication that is designed to end the life of the patient.

Changing death certificates, for political purposes, has long-term consequences on future research concerning life-expectancy for certain medical conditions but it also affects the ability of law enforcement from investigating potential murder.

Similar to other bills, the proposed assisted suicide request letter uses the term may self-administer. I am fully aware that the assisted suicide lobby says that may self-administer means that a person may decide not to take the lethal drugs, but it also means that someone else may administer the lethal drugs (homicide). The term may self-administer protects physicians or others from being charged with homicide, if they administer the lethal drugs.

Assisted suicide laws are designed to protect medical professionals who are willing to be involved with killing their patients by prescribing lethal drugs. Assisted suicide bills are not designed to protect the person who has asked for death, even though the person asking for death may be experiencing depression, feelings of hopelessness, social isolation and fear, all conditions that are properly dealt with by caring interventions and not killing. 

• Article: Oregon 2020 assisted suicide report - 28% increase in asisted suicide deaths (Link).
  

New Mexico passes a dangerous, discriminatory assisted suicide law.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Matt Valliere

Matt Valliere, the executive director of the Patients Rights Action Fund, wrote a scathing review of the New Mexico assisted suicide law that was published in Newsweek today.

Valliere criticises New Mexico for legalizing assisted suicide during the pandemic but he focuses on how these laws are suseptible to abuse, mistakes and coercion. He first focuses on the fact that the New Mexico law permits non-doctors to participate in assisted suicide. He states:

Beyond the fact that every supposed "safeguard" in the New Mexico law and others like it is unenforceable and circumventable, legislators in the state have allowed medical professionals with less training to facilitate patients' suicide. Doctors themselves are not always accurate in their prognostications, and patients could throw away good months, years or even decades over a best-guess mistake. Patients like Jeannette Hall, who would have killed herself with assisted suicide but is, thankfully, still alive decades later.

New Mexico legislators have endangered vulnerable patients by allowing even physician assistants and nurse practitioners to determine that a requesting patient has six months or less to live and provide them with suicide drugs. Medicare clearly prohibits nurse practitioners and physician assistants from certifying a terminal prognosis of six months when it comes to hospice eligibility. Suicide cannot be undone, and no matter who is determining eligibility, medical professionals make mistakes.

As I wrote in the past, Valliere focuses on why the New Mexico assisted suicide bill is the most permissive bill in the nation. Valliere comments on the law:

It defines "adult" as "a resident of the state who is eighteen years of age or older," but repeatedly uses the term "individual" rather than "adult" to delineate who is eligible for assisted suicide. Notably, the term "individual" is not defined, meaning that assisted suicide could be made available to non-residents and even children, potentially making New Mexico not only a destination for irresponsible suicide "tourism," but also the abuse of minors.

Valliere then exposes some of the assisted suicide abuses from Oregon

Assisted suicide laws invite elder and disability abuse while granting immunity to all those participating. For example, Michael Freeland, who had experienced acute depression and attempted suicide multiple times over several decades, received the lethal prescription and was left at home with the suicide drugs, even though medical professionals had previously removed all other means of his taking his own life from his home. So too, an elderly dementia patient, Kate Cheney, was referred for the non-required psychiatric evaluation and denied the lethal dose. Then, her daughter shopped around for a doctor until she found one who would say Ms. Cheney had "capacity" to make this life-and-death decision; that same doctor wrote in the report that Ms. Cheney's "choices may be influenced by her family's wishes and her daughter, Erika, may be somewhat coercive."

Valliere concludes his article by urging other states to reject assisted suicide.

Giving medical professionals immunity to assist in their patients' suicide not only fails to address any of the system's problems, but exacerbates the current disparities. The rest of us can avoid making the same mistake in other states by rejecting dangerous and discriminatory assisted suicide laws.

Previous articles about the New Mexico assisted suicide bill that is now the law

• New Mexico poised to legalize assisted suicide (Link).
• I was frustrated by the lies told during the New Mexico assisted suicide HB 47 legislative hearings (Link).
• New Mexico legislature will once again debate an extreme assisted suicide bill (Link).
  

New Mexico poised to legalize assisted suicide.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

The Associated Press reported that New Mexico's Senate passed an amended version of assisted suicide Bill HB 47 by a vote of 24 to 17. HB 47 had passed in the House, without amendments, by a vote of 39 to 27. The bill will go back to the House for a vote on the Senate amendments.

Deborah Armstrong (D) who sponsored HB 47 also sponsored the two previous assisted suicide bills.

Senator Joseph Cervantes sponsored amendments to HB 47 that passed. The amendments:

1. Deleted Section 7 which required falsification of the death certificate.
2. Deleted Section 8 which allowed life insurance or annuities to be collected.
3. Eliminated civil immunity from Section 9 for prescribers of lethal drugs.
4. Eliminated a provision which opened health care facilities to liability if they prohibit employees from participating in assisted suicides.

I was frustrated when presenting to the New Mexico legislative committee on HB-47. The "expert" witnesses claimed that HB 47 is one of the tightest assisted suicide bills anywhere. In reality HB 47 is the widest assisted suicide bill in America.

All current assisted suicide laws require physicians to approve and prescribe lethal drugs. HB 47 allows non-physicians defined as "health care providers" which includes physicians, or licensed physician assistants, or osteopathic physicians, or nurses registered in advanced practice to approve or prescribe lethal drugs.

All current assisted suicide laws require a psychologist or psychiatrist to counsel a person, when a "health care provider" questions the ability of a person to consent. HB 47 defines counselors as: state-licensed psychiatrist, psychologist, master social worker, psychiatric nurse practitioner or professional clinical mental health counselor.

Unlike existing assisted suicide legislation, HB 47 does not require a 15 day waiting period but only requires a 48 hour waiting period that can be waived if the health care provider believes that the person may be imminently dying. Therefore HB 47 technically allows a same day death. A person could request assisted suicide on a "bad day" and die the same day. Studies prove that the “will to live” fluctuates.

HB 47 Section 3 (G) waives the requirement that a person's condition be confirmed by a second health care provider if the person requesting assisted suicide is enrolled in a hospice program. This is the only assisted suicide bill that waives the requirement that a second health care provider assess the requester.

They expert witnesses also claimed that HB 47 had iron clad conscience protections for health care providers. The reality is that HB 47 trampled on conscience rights.

HB 47 states that health care providers who are unwilling to carry out a request for assisted suicide shall inform the individual and refer the individual to a health care provider who is able and willing to carry out the individual's request or to another individual or entity to assist the requesting individual in seeking medical aid in dying.

Therefore a conscientious objector must participate in the act by referring the patient for assisted suicide to a health care provider who is willing to prescribe lethal drugs.

In 2019 Deborah Armstrong, sponsored assisted suicide bill, HB 90, which I called the most extreme assisted suicide bill in America. Among other concerns, HB 90 allowed assisted suicide for psychiatric conditions, to be done to someone with an undefined "terminal prognosis," to be done by nurses and physician assistants, and it even allowed it to be approved via telemedicine.

The amended bill will likely pass in the House. Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham has stated that she will sign the bill into law.

Diné Hataałii Association: Reject dangerous discriminatory assisted suicide bills

This guest column was published by the Navajo Times on March 15, 2021

The Diné Hataałii Association released the following statement on Monday, which outlines opposition to current legislation being considered that would attempt to legalize assisted suicide in the state of New Mexico.

As Diné (Navajo), we have a distinct culture and language, and time-honored norms, values, and philosophy of life that pre-dates colonial, western ways of being.

As such, the Diné Hataałii Association is firmly opposed to H.B. 47/S.B. 308, legislation to legalize assisted suicide in New Mexico, as a dangerous measure that will have adverse impact on our Diné (Navajo) people.

DHA exists to protect, preserve, and promote the Diné cultural wisdom, spiritual practice, and ceremonial knowledge for present and future generations.

DHA is certified and incorporated under the auspices of the Navajo Nation Division of Economic Development.

Continuing as the original medicine people since time immemorial, the DHA members offer public health support through ceremonial interventions, herbal therapies, storytelling, and sharing of cultural knowledge.

Diné Be’ezéé’ Ííł’íní Yee Da’ahótą’ígíí, the Diné Hataałii Association are in reality, the first responders and undeniably essential, frontline public health workers who have always assisted the Navajo Nation.

The role and responsibilities of the DHA and its members is to maintain the overall health and wellness of our people and the Nation.

DHA also provides cultural consultation and technical assistance to local and state authorities and other entities on health and safety related matters, which could not be more important to our people in the age of the COVID-19 pandemic.

HB 47/SB 308 create an untenable situation in which assisted suicide will be allowed and runs counter to our belief that every life is sacred and must be treated as such.

To disregard one’s life also runs counter to who we are as healers and directly violates the Navajo Nation Fundamental Laws and, therefore, is an act of utmost disregard and exclusion of how we view life. Life is meant to be lived, not extinguished heedlessly.

Further, HB 47/SB 308 protect medical providers who support and prescribe assisted suicide by giving them the ability to coerce the patient, pick up the lethal drugs and give them to the patient without his/her consent.

No medical professionals are required to be present at the time of death so the patient’s heir or caregiver can administer the drugs without fear of being caught.

This careless legislation, by HB 47/SB 308 will only instigate abuse of our elders – who are sacred – will likely promote more serious conflicts on life and death issues in New Mexico.

There is no requirement for prescribing physicians to ensure sound psychological/psychiatric capacity through psychological/psychiatric evaluation of patients who are depressed, experiencing a mental health diagnosis and contemplating assisted suicide.

The suicide rate among our Diné people is over 2.5 times the national average. How do we hope to curb this suicide tragedy among our people if we support legislation that provides immunity for physicians who engage in prescribed suicide?

For all of these reasons and, especially, to protect our community and elders, we urge New Mexico senators and the governor to reject this dangerous and discriminatory public policy.

The diversity of the residents of New Mexico is reflected by the unique health and life needs of all our residents. Therefore, all laws entertained by New Mexico must adhere to the uniqueness and differences inclusive of Native American beliefs, including the Diné cultural healing beliefs, healing philosophies and interventions as well as the culturally relevant teachings/stories.

It is our sovereign authority as Diné people to institute our own health solutions that meet our unique needs, and to support our culturally relevant methods and tools for healing and restoration toward Hózhó.

The Diné Hataałii Association is comprised of leaders and caretakers of Diné traditional cultural wisdom, ceremony, and herbal healing knowledge. We represent the original health care system of the Diné.

We are invoked with a special purpose in this world to ensure that the Navajo Nation continues its journey towards restoring health, Hózhó (happiness, well-being, harmony, balance) and the utmost protection of Iiná (life).

We will continue working towards this end as we have always done.

I was frustrated with the lies told during the New Mexico assisted suicide HB 47 legislative hearings.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

New Mexico legislature

Yesterday was the second time that I presented (by zoom) before a New Mexico legislative committee hearing concerning HB 47 the bill to legalize assisted suicide.

My concern with the legislative committee hearing was not the one minute for every regular witness. Not much can be said in one minute.

My frustration related to the lies told by the "expert" witnesses, who had more time, concerning the bill.

1. The "expert" witnesses claimed that HB 47 is one of the tightest assisted suicide bills anywhere.

Reality: HB 47 is the widest assisted suicide bill being considered in America.

All current assisted suicide laws require physicians to approve and prescribe lethal drugs. HB 47 allows non-physicians defined as "health care providers" which includes physicians, or licensed physician assistants, or osteopathic physicians, or nurses registered in advanced practice to approve or prescribe lethal drugs.

All current assisted suicide laws require a psychologist or psychiatrist to counsel a person, when a "health care provider" questions the ability of a person to consent. HB 47 defines counselors as: state-licensed psychiatrist, psychologist, master social worker, psychiatric nurse practitioner or professional clinical mental health counselor.

Unlike existing assisted suicide legislation, HB 47 does not require a 15 day waiting period but only requires a 48 hour waiting period that can be waived if the health care provider believes that the person may be imminently dying. Therefore HB 47 technically allows a same day death. A person could request assisted suicide on a "bad day" and die the same day. Studies prove that the “will to live” fluctuates.

HB 47 Section 3 (G) waives the requirement that a person's condition be confirmed by a second health care provider if the person requesting assisted suicide is enrolled in a hospice program. This is the only assisted suicide bill that waives the requirement that a second health care provider assess the requester.

2. They claimed that HB 47 has iron clad conscience protections for health care providers.

Reality: HB 47 tramples on conscience rights.

HB 47 states that health care providers who are unwilling to carry out a request for assisted suicide shall inform the individual and refer the individual to a health care provider who is able and willing to carry out the individual's request or to another individual or entity to assist the requesting individual in seeking medical aid in dying.

Therefore a conscientious objector must participate in the act by referring the patient for assisted suicide to a health care provider who is willing to prescribe lethal drugs.

Remember, in 2019 New Mexico State Rep Deborah Armstrong, sponsored assisted suicide bill, HB 90, which was the most extreme assisted suicide bill that I had seen in America. Among other concerns, HB 90 allowed assisted suicide for psychiatric conditions, to be done to someone with an undefined "terminal prognosis," to be done by nurses and physician assistants, and it even allowed it to be approved via telemedicine.

Deborah Armstrong wants to legalize assisted suicide to make it an option for her daughter who is battling cancer. I understand their fear of a bad death. But giving doctors the right in law to be involved with killing people is a dangerous public policy.  

Who do they think they are fooling. We are all capable of reading HB 47 and recognizing the lies, lies and more lies from the assisted suicide lobby "experts."