Petition: The US Food and Drug Administration must investigate assisted suicide drug cocktails

To the FDA's Compounding Incidents Program, (Link to the online petition). (Link to the paper petition).

The petitioners draw your attention to the following:

Whereas the compounded drug cocktails being used for assisted suicide have had high rates of overdose, failure of expected pharmacological action, and adverse experiences associated with their use for assisted suicide; and;

Whereas the experiments that continue to be done to develop the compounded drug cocktails used for assisted suicide violate the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ regulations for the protection of human subjects under 45 CFR part 46;

Therefore, we call on the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to investigate the adverse drug experiences with the compounded drug cocktails used for assisted suicide.

(Link to the online petition). (Link to the paper petition).

Information:

Despite claims that assisted suicide is a painless death, complications with assisted suicide remain common, and in fact have increased over the last decade. The FDA’s Compounding Incidents Program aims to protect the public against poor quality compounded drugs, yet no research has been done on whether the assisted suicide cocktails currently in use meet current standards.

An article by Manuela Callari published by Medscape on March 13, 2025, asked the question, “Do We Know Enough About Assisted Dying Drugs?” (1) Claud Regnard, MD, a retired palliative medicine consultant in the UK told Medscape:

“The amount of evidence supporting the use of these drugs is astoundingly small. The last study looking at efficacy and side effects was published 25 years ago, using data from 10 years earlier. 

“You wouldn’t allow this in any way with any other sort of drugs,” Regnard said. In a 2022 study, he found that drugs used for assisted dying have not undergone the usual level of scrutiny.(2)

The pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of these drugs at high doses remain poorly understood. “We extrapolate from therapeutic doses, but we have no proper data on what happens at lethal doses,” Regnard said. “That’s not science—that’s guesswork.”

Based on the Oregon data we know that there are serious problems with the use of compounded drugs for assisted suicide. 

The 2023 Oregon Death with Dignity Act report indicated that the longest time for an assisted suicide death was 137 hours (five days plus 17 hours) and the assisted suicide complications rate was almost 10%. In Oregon, complications are only reported when a health care provider is present at the death. In 2023, there were ten known complications based on 102 reports from health care providers. (3)

Regarding the assisted suicide drug trials, JoNel Aleccia reported the following for The Seattle Times on March 5, 2017:

[Dr. Carol] Parrot and [Dr. Robert] Wood are part of a seven-member group of doctors in the Northwest who came up with the three-drug protocol after Valeant Pharmaceuticals Inc. acquired the rights to secobarbital, known as Seconal, in 2015 and raised the price sharply. 

“We wanted the new drug regime to be safe, reliable and effective—and cost $500 or less,” said Parrot.

Earlier in the article, Aleccia states,

The first Seconal alternative turned out to be too harsh, burning patients’ mouths and throats, causing some to scream in pain. The second drug mix, used 67 times, has led to deaths that stretched out hours in some patients—and up to 31 hours in one case. (4)

Lisa Krieger’s article, published in Medical Xpress on September 8, 2020, also reported on the lethal drug cocktail trials:

A little-known secret, not publicized by advocates of aid-in-dying, was that while most deaths were speedy, others were very slow. Some patients lingered for six or nine hours; a few, more than three days. No one knew why, or what needed to change. 

“The public thinks that you take a pill and you’re done,” said Dr. Gary Pasternak, chief medical officer of Mission Hospice in San Mateo. “But it’s more complicated than that.” (5)

Doctors who participate in assisted suicide developed lethal compounded drug cocktails with human trials. The developers were concerned with the lethal efficacy and cost of the drug cocktail as opposed to the negative consequences associated with its use. The assisted suicide drug cocktail trials appear to have violated the Nuremburg Code.

We, the petitioners, call on the FDA to perform an investigation into the use of compounded drug cocktails used for assisted suicide based on the high rates of adverse experiences and into the experiments done to develop the assisted suicide drug cocktails that appear to have violated 45 CFR part 46.

References:

1. Manuela Callari, “Do We Know Enough About Assisted Dying Drugs?” Medscape, March 13, 2025 https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/do-we-know-enough-about-assisted-dying-drugs-2025a100064q?form=fpf, accessed June 16, 2025.
2. Worthington, A., Finlay, I., and Regnard C. (March 10, 2022). Efficacy and safety of drugs used for ‘assisted dying’ British Medical Bulletin. 142:15-22. https://doi.org/10.1093/bmb/idac009
3. Oregon Death with Dignity Act 2023 report https://www.oregon.gov/oha/PH/PROVIDERPARTNERRESOURCES/EVALUATIONRESEARCH/DEATHWITHDIGNITYACT/Documents/year26.pdf, accessed June 16, 2025.
4. JoNel Aleccia, “Northwest doctors rethink aid-in-dying drugs to avoid prolonged deaths,” The Seattle Times, October 5, 2017, https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/health/northwest-doctors-rethink-aid-in-dying-drugs-to-avoid-prolonged-deaths/, accessed June 16, 2025.
5. Lisa Kreiger, “Doctors seek life-ending drugs that smooth the way for the terminally ill,” The Medical Express, September 8, 2020, https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-09-doctors-life-ending-drugs-smooth-terminally.html, accessed June 16, 2025.

Physicians group urges New York Governor to veto assisted suicide bill.

Dear Governor Hochul,

My name is Dr Sharon Quick and I am President of Physicians for Compassionate Care Education Foundation (PCCEF), an organization without religious or political affiliation that advocates for the vulnerable at end of life. I have expertise in pediatric anesthesia, critical care, and medical ethics. We oppose A 136. Please veto this poorly constructed bill.

Summary: A 136, like other medically-assisted suicide laws, inevitably violates (rather than upholds) patient autonomy; creates (based on subjective, often inaccurate, criteria) a class of marginalized patients with the disability of terminal illness from whom the standard of medical care can be withheld; allows lethal drugs to unnecessarily substitute for good palliative care and pain control; disproportionately preys on those with mental health problems and disabilities; and destroys the foundation of medical ethics, creating distrust among patients and the health care profession. In addition, A 136 is the most radical policy in the country because it has no waiting period for obtaining lethal drugs. It also has no residency requirement which could turn New York into an international assisted suicide tourism destination for one-stop lethal drug prescriptions. Will New York citizens have to pay for funerals and/or transport of bodies back to their home states and countries? The bill makes no provision for the fact that out-of-state citizens or non-citizens may be pressured to take lethal drugs immediately and they are not required to make funeral and burial arrangements.

1. Pain should never be a reason to seek lethal drugs. Complaints of excessive symptoms indicate doctors lack palliative care knowledge, such as when to refer to pain management specialists. Lethal drugs should never be a solution for lack of education. In addition, those in significant pain lack capacity to consent for lethal drugs. Instead, improve palliative care access and expertise, which has been assessed as likely insufficient to meet the needs of New York.1 There is evidence that minorities, the uninsured, those on Medicaid, and those living in disadvantaged communities may encounter barriers to receiving palliative care.2 It would be a tragedy for these under served populations if this legislation made lethal prescriptions more accessible than palliative care.

2. This bill has no waiting period to obtain lethal drugs; no other law is so rash. Immediate death does not give adequate time for appropriate discussion and interventions for vulnerable patients who make rash decisions out of fear, depression, embarrassment, subtle pressure by a tired caregiver who makes them feel like a burden, or other reversible or transient concerns. Such patients often change their minds and no longer want to hasten death.

3. Physicians may be wrong about a patient’s prognosis, and they often miss depression and compromised decision-making capacity. Patients in WA and OR have died up to 5 years beyond their original “terminal” diagnosis and receipt of lethal drugs. Neither mental health status nor capacity are required to be assessed immediately before a patient ingests lethal drugs, which could be years after initial assessment; there is no guarantee that patients are not compromised at that time.

4. Lethal drugs are not a proportionate means of achieving palliative care goals but devalue vulnerable patients in a way that violates the very goals palliative care aims to achieve. Assisted suicide is abandonment, not health care, and is not part of palliative medicine. Lethal cocktails are bitter-tasting, sometimes mouth-burning liquids, and patients must ice their mouths with popsicles and take anti-emetics just to get them down. Risks include nausea, vomiting, aspiration, seizures, and not dying. Palliative care can do far better.

5. Lethal drug prescriptions undermine autonomy and discriminate against the disability community. Requests for lethal drugs are not primarily for pain but because of depression and/or psychological responses to disabilities developed during terminal illness--which is itself a disability by both social security and ADA criteria. This bill grants new choices and power to doctors, not patients, allowing them to treat patients unequally, subjectively placing them into either (1) a protected group (getting standard mental health care) or (2) a marginalized group with the disability of terminal illness (who can be abandoned to lethal drugs). This discriminates against the disability community and undermines autonomy by violating equality of persons. New York does not need a two-tiered health system that devalues those with the disability of terminal illness.

6. The slippery slope is real. Patients with depression and those with non-terminal diagnoses of anorexia, hernia, arthritis, and “medical complications” have received lethal drugs. Hundreds of doctors’ and patients’ consent forms are missing in Washington and Colorado.

a. In 2023, Oregonian Cody Sontag decided to avoid advanced dementia by killing herself via voluntarily stopping eating and drinking (called VSED). An Oregon doctor declared her “terminally ill” due to dehydration from VSED. He waived the waiting period, prescribed lethal drugs immediately, and Cody died from them.(3) Dehydration is not “incurable” or “irreversible,” as legally required. How many others with non-terminal diagnoses have used VSED to access lethal drugs? No one—least of all physicians whom the vulnerable must be able to trust—should be granted god-like powers to decide which disabilities make life worthless, prey on those who lack capacity, and assist with termination of those so judged.

7. There is no mechanism to enforce the law or detect abuse, which is perhaps why no sanctions have been reported. The design of this bill, like other assisted suicide laws, is a set-up for undetected elder abuse, coercion, or murder, given neither capacity re-evaluation nor the presence a neutral party are required when patients ingest lethal drugs (sometimes weeks, months, or years after initial evaluation).

8. Doctors often devalue those with disabilities. Protect the medical profession from acting on that bias by not granting them power to assist the suicides of patients disabled by terminal illness—especially a bill that has no more oversight than Oregon, where physicians are not disciplined for ending the lives of those with non-terminal illness (like Cody).

9. Protect the medical profession from distrust, both between patients and their doctors and among doctors. Patients in the northwest who are opposed to assisted suicide now have legitimate fears that doctors might overlook depression or compromised capacity, devalue them, and prescribe lethal drugs if they request hastened death while depressed or in a moment of vulnerable weakness. A death request is often a plea for help, and people often change their minds about hastening death with time, treatment, and support. Dr. Bentz lost trust in colleagues after referring a patient to an oncologist who, over Dr. Bentz’ objections, gave lethal drugs to his patient instead of treating his depression.

10. This bill contains potential conscience violations for physicians and health care employers:

a. Requires falsifying the death certificate, naming the underlying disease as the cause, rather than the actual cause of death—lethal drugs (p. 12, lines 12-14)

b. It is unclear whether an objecting health care employer can prohibit physician employees from providing information about lethal drug provision or referring patients for them, or whether objecting physicians could be forced to inform or refer for this process, both of which would violate their conscience for participation in an unethical practice that is not medical care.

11. Finally, participants do not need to be New York residents, which may allow persons out-of-state (or country) to obtain lethal drugs. These patients may not receive adequate evaluation, especially of capacity and lack of coercion, by New York physicians who may not know them well. Non-residents would be pressured to take the lethal drugs immediately in New York to avoid legal complications from ingestion in their home state/country, when many patients hold on to the drugs for weeks, months, and even years, and some never take them. New York may become an international assisted suicide tourism destination.

Please veto A 136. I am happy to answer any questions you may have.

Sincerely,
Sharon Quick, MD, MA (Bioethics)
President, Physicians for Compassionate Care Education Foundation (PCCEF)

P.O. Box 7122 Bonney Lake WA 98491 Tel: 253-501-7011 or info@pccef.org, www.pccef.org

1. CAPC. Palliative Care in New York. 2025. (Link)
2. Chambers B. How to Increase Awareness and Reduce Gaps in Palliative Care for MinoritiesJuly 9, 2020. (Link) (accessed 9-22-2024).
3. Pope TM, Brodoff L. Medical aid in dying to avoid late-stage dementia. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 2024: 1-7. (Link).

Assisted suicide bills do not specify which lethal drugs are used.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Raga Justin has brought up an important point in her article that was published on May 15 in the Times Union, that being, the New York assisted suicide bill does not stipulate what drugs would be used in the lethal poison cocktail, if the assisted suicide bill passes.

Article: Assisted suicide is neither painles or dignified (Link).

Justin wrote in the Times article that:

The controversial legislation dubbed “Medical Aid in Dying” would enable New York residents suffering from a terminal illness to end their own lives using a series of medications administered under a physician’s care after thorough review of their situation. The “drug cocktail” that patients would need to be administered to die was frequently questioned by opponents, with many lawmakers also worrying out loud about the possibility of those drugs being diverted for nefarious purposes.

“That medication is as dangerous as a loaded gun but precautions for its safekeeping are absent from this legislation,” said Assemblywoman Mary Beth Walsh, a Saratoga County Republican.

Yet the legislation contains nothing about which substances, exactly, New York would choose to legalize for the purpose of ending a person’s life. Instead, lawmakers have appeared to relinquish control of determining what life-ending mixtures of medications would be used to the state Department of Health, individual health care providers and participating pharmacies.

Justin further noted that “The time it takes a patient to die is not certain.”

Oregon’s data, culled from 261 deaths during 2024, showed that patients died in a range from seven minutes to 26 hours from ingestion of life-ending drugs. The New York bill language includes a consent form that patients would need to sign to authorize their participation in the procedure; it includes an acknowledgement that “although most deaths occur within three hours, my death may take longer.”

It’s an approach that has angered other physicians, who argue the process of choosing which drugs to administer has not undergone exhaustive, controlled scientific study.

“From my perspective, the widely varying, seemingly experimental nature of the cocktails that they use raise huge concerns and red flags,” said Dr. Joseph Marine, a cardiologist and professor of medicine at Johns Hopkins University who has lobbied against Maryland’s adoption of similar legislation. “Virtually anything in the pharmacopeia is fair game for them to effectively experiment on, without any of the usual safeguards that we take for granted in academic medical settings.”

The longest reported length of death by assisted suicide was 137 hours in Oregon in 2023. Let me state that again, one person took 5 days and 17 hours to die by assisted suicide in 2023, after ingesting the lethal poison cocktail.

An article by JoNel Aleccia published by Kaiser Health News on March 5, 2017 examined the experiments by assisted suicide activists to find a cheaper alternative drug cocktail for assisted suicide. The article states:

The first Seconal alternative turned out to be too harsh, burning patients’ mouths and throats, causing some to scream in pain. The second drug mix, used 67 times, has led to deaths that stretched out hours in some patients — and up to 31 hours in one case.

The poison drug cocktail experiments were done with humans, not animals even though people suffered greatly during the experimental assisted suicide deaths.

Link to a video by Dr William Toffler of Oregon on this topic (Link).

An article by Jennie Dear published on January 22, 2019 in the Atlantic reported on the development of the poison drug cocktails. The Atlantic article stated:

In Washington, an advocacy organization called End of Life Washington briefly advised prescribing a drug mixture with the sedative chloral hydrate to about 70 patients. “We know this is going to put you to sleep, and we’re pretty sure it’s going to kill you,” Robert Wood, a medical director at the organization, says they told the patients. It worked, but with a tragic catch: In a few cases, the chloral hydrate burned people’s throats, causing severe pain just at the time they expected relief.

The Atlantic article explains how the assisted suicide lobby did human experiments with a lethal poison cocktail known as DMP. The article continued:

Next, the group had to test the drug. But they still didn’t have a way to follow standard procedure: There would be no government-approved clinical drug trial, and no Institutional Review Board oversight when they prescribed the concoction to patients. The doctors took what precautions they could. Patients could opt in or out, and for the first 10 deaths, either Parrot or Law would stay by the bedside and record patients’ and families’ responses.

The first two deaths went smoothly. But the third patient, an 81-year-old with prostate cancer, took 18 hours to die.The article explains that the group stopped DMP testing, met by conference call and decided to try a new lethal cocktail called DDMP.

The Atlantic article explained how the assisted suicide lobby developed the lethal drug cocktail DDMP, and later DDMP2 that is referred to in the 2018 Oregon DWD report.

An article by Lisa Krieger published by the Medical Xpress on September 8, 2020 also reported on the lethal drug experiments. Krieger wrote:

A little-known secret, not publicized by advocates of aid-in-dying, was that while most deaths were speedy, others were very slow. Some patients lingered for six or nine hours; a few, more than three days. No one knew why, or what needed to change.

"The public thinks that you take a pill and you're done," said Dr. Gary Pasternak, chief medical officer of Mission Hospice in San Mateo. "But it's more complicated than that."

Justin asked more questions in his article about research concerning the efficacy of the lethal poison cocktail.

But significant concerns persist among some researchers about those fatal drug combinations. A 2022 study published in the British Medical Bulletin by United Kingdom researchers reviewed data reported from jurisdictions where medically assisted death was legal and concluded that many patients were at risk of “distressing” death. It called for further research into the methods of assisted suicide and the prescribed drugs in order to adequately inform patients of the risk involved with consuming life-ending medications.

“Drugs used for medical purposes are required to undergo a stringent approval process in order to assess efficacy and safety,” researchers concluded. “But the drugs being used for ‘assisted dying’ have not undergone such process; the safety and effectiveness of previous and current combinations of lethal drugs is largely unknown.”

Some assisted suicide doctors claim that the drug cocktails are effective for use, based on many years of trial and error.

The assisted suicide lobby developed the lethal poison cocktails through human trials. The "developers" seemed concerned with the lethal efficacy and cost of the poison cocktail as opposed to the possible negative consequences associated with the use of the cocktail.

The concerns raised by Justin in his article are fundamental to the issue. If the law approves the killing of people, then what kind of oversight will exist within the law?

Links to more articles on this topic:

• Death by assisted suicide is not what you think it is (Link). 
• Assisted suicide: Proceed with caution (Link). 
• Assisted suicide is the wrong prescription (Link). 
• Assisted suicide. It's not that simple (Link). 
• Assisted suicide deaths are not what you think they are (Link). 
• Assisted suicide is neither painless nor dignified (Link).

Do we know enough about euthanasia drugs?

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Manuela Callari reported in an article published by Medscape on March 13, 2025 that we don't know enough about assisted dying drugs. Callari interviewed several physicians who are doing euthanasia and a doctor who does palliative care research.

Callari begins the article by stating:

The medical community is accustomed to rigorous standards for drug development and approval. But in the context of assisted dying, there is a surprising and persisting lack of robust scientific data.

Steven Pleiter

Callari interviews Steven Pleiter the former managing director of the Dutch Center of Expertise for Euthanasia (Euthanasia clinic) who states:

“It’s very hard to do scientific research with regard to the usage of drugs for euthanasia. If you apply euthanasia, you want to be successful, and you can’t use any other drugs than the drugs we know work,”

“But the evidence is based on years and years of experience.”

Claud Regnard, MD, a retired palliative medicine consultant in the United Kingdom told Callari that:

“The amount of evidence supporting the use of these drugs is astoundingly small,

 “The last study looking at efficacy and side effects was published 25 years ago, using data from 10 years earlier.”

Dr Claud Regnard

Callari reported that unlike other areas of medicine, assisted dying has largely escaped rigorous scientific evaluation. He reported Regnard as stating:

“You wouldn’t allow this in any way with any other sort of drugs,” Regnard said. In a 2022 study, he found that drugs used for assisted dying have not undergone the usual level of scrutiny.

The pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of these drugs at high doses remain poorly understood. “We extrapolate from therapeutic doses, but we have no proper data on what happens at lethal doses,” Regnard said. "That's not science — that's guesswork.”

Collari explained that:

Euthanasia is when a doctor directly ends the life of a patient, while assisted dying is when a doctor provides the means for them to end their own life.

(Collari should use the term assisted suicide rather than assisted dying. Assisted dying is often used for both euthanasia and assisted suicide.)

Collari reported Regnard as stating:

He said most jurisdictions, like Switzerland, the Netherlands, Belgium, Canada, and Australia, do not systematically collect or publish data on assisted dying drug efficacy, mechanisms, and complications. “Oregon is the only jurisdiction providing some transparency, but even their data is severely incomplete,”

Collari continues:

The Netherlands, one of the first European countries to legalize euthanasia and assisted dying, has developed guidelines on their implementation, now in their third edition.

Pleiter explains how euthanasia is done in the Netherlands:

For euthanasia, the standard Dutch protocol involves an initial injection of thiopental or propofol at doses several times higher than those used in general anesthesia to induce a deep coma. This is followed by administering a neuromuscular blocking agent such as rocuronium, atracurium, or cisatracurium in doses sufficient to cause complete paralysis and eventual death. “Most people die after the coma-inducing drug because it’s such a high dose,”  

“The patient will die within seconds. It’s very rapid.”

We know that the patient does not die within seconds in Oregon, where the Oregon 2023 assisted suicide report indicates that the longest time of death in 2023 was 137 hours. Collari then explains how assisted suicide is done in Switzerland

In Switzerland, a commonly used drug is the fast-acting barbiturate sodium pentobarbital, according to documentation provided by Dignitas to Medscape Medical News. This is usually taken orally or, in some cases, via a gastric tube or intravenously. The documentation did not include specific data on this drug’s efficacy or complication rates. Dignitas declined a request for an interview.

None of these drugs are approved for euthanasia and there is no standardized protocol. Regnard explains:

There is no standardized global approach to drug selection and dosing for either euthanasia or assisted dying, and the process is mainly empirical. “There isn’t a single drug regulatory authority anywhere in the world that has assessed and approved assisted dying drugs [in the doses required for this purpose],”

Instead, these medications are approved for indications such as anesthesia or epilepsy, and their use in euthanasia or assisted dying falls under off-label prescribing. Physicians rely on guidelines established by medical associations, expert committees, and historical clinical practice for their use.

Since Oregon is the only jurisdiction that collects data on the use of assisted dying drug coctails, Regnard provides an analysis of the Oregon data:

In a 2023 report from the US state of Oregon, 74% of complication data were missing. Of the available data, 9%-11% of patients experienced complications, including vomiting, aspiration, agitation, and seizures. “In some cases, patients regained consciousness after ingesting a lethal dose,” he said.

The time to death also varies widely — from minutes to several hours. Factors such as the specific drugs used, the route of administration, and individual patient factors can all play a role. In some cases, death may occur rapidly, while in others it may take longer. This variability can be distressing for both the patient and their loved ones, particularly if they expect a swift and peaceful death, he argued.

Article: Death by assisted suicide is not what you think it is. (Link).

Pleiter agrees that the evidence concerning the safe use of these drugs and  evidence concerning complications is anecdotal. Pleiter's comments actually reinforce the research by Regnard. Regnard continues by pointing out that:

The lack of reliable data also raises concerns about informed consent. Patients are often reassured that their death will be peaceful, but without comprehensive studies, how can such promises be guaranteed?

Regnard asks:

“How can you get informed consent from a patient when the data isn’t there?”

“Until they produce the data, the data is purely anecdotal. We wouldn’t tolerate that level of uncertainty in palliative care, so why are we tolerating it here?”

Collari reports that Pleiter argued that, based on experience, the Dutch protocols work:

Pleiter noted that euthanasia has been practiced in the Netherlands for two decades, with consistent guidelines that have undergone only minor revisions. More than 100,000 patients have undergone the procedure using these established protocols. The core drug dosages have remained mostly unchanged. “When the correct drugs are administered at the right doses, there are no issues, and the outcome is always certain,” he said. Having overseen almost 5000 cases, Pleiter said he has never encountered complications.

But Mario Riccio, MD, a retired anesthetist, current advisor of the Luca Coscioni Association, an assisted dying group in Italy told Collari

“Even with precautions, the process is not always smooth. There can be moments of discomfort and unexpected reactions — things we simply cannot control. But for someone whose suffering is so excruciating that he is determined to die, minor complications are completely surmountable.”

There is no evidence concerning the use of euthanasia and assisted suicide poison coctails. 

Links to more articles on this topic:

• Death by assisted suicide is not what you think it is (Link). 
• Assisted suicide: Proceed with caution (Link). 
• Assisted suicide is the wrong prescription (Link). 
• Assisted suicide. It's not that simple (Link). 
• Assisted suicide deaths are not what you think they are (Link). 
• Assisted suicide is neither painless nor dignified (Link).

Death by assisted suicide is not what you think it is

In 2023, the longest time of death for assisted suicide was 137 hours.

Alex Schadenberg

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, 

Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

I had the opportunity on Monday, February 24, to speak at the British Parliament (Westminster) about the reality of assisted suicide in America. I focused on the experience with assisted suicide in Oregon and California. 

The UK assisted suicide bill that is sponsored by Kim Leadbeater is similar to American style assisted suicide laws.

Members of Parliament or their staff came to my presentation based on having time between meetings. Several MP's or their staff attended the event and asked excellent questions.

One MP, who attended, supported the Leadbeater assisted suicide bill. He is a new MP who told me that he only had 10 minutes for me between meetings.

I shared some basic data concerning assisted suicide in America including the bills that the assisted suicide lobby are promoting to expand assisted suicide in states where it is legal. I made it very clear that the strategy of the assisted suicide lobby is to first get a bill passed and then to amend the bill later.

Article: Once legal, assisted suicide laws inevitably expand (Article Link).

I then stated:

The assisted suicide lobby doesn't want to talk about how assisted suicide is done. They want you to think that the person is given a few pills and then quickly and peacefully dies. This is not the case.

I explained that in 2023, in Oregon one person who died by assisted suicide took 137 hours to die.

I then talked about how the assisted suicide lobby have been experimenting with lethal poison drug cocktails, for years, to find a cheaper way to cause death.

An article by JoNel Aleccia published by Kaiser Health News on March 5, 2017 examined the experiments by assisted suicide activists to find a cheaper alternative drug cocktail for assisted suicide. The article states:

The first Seconal alternative turned out to be too harsh, burning patients’ mouths and throats, causing some to scream in pain. The second drug mix, used 67 times, has led to deaths that stretched out hours in some patients — and up to 31 hours in one case.

The poison drug cocktail experiments were done with humans, not animals. Even though people suffered greatly the poison cocktail experiments were done on at least 67 people.

Link to a video by Dr William Toffler of Oregon on this topic (Link).

An article by Jennie Dear published on January 22, 2019 in the Atlantic reported on the development of the poison drug cocktails. The Atlantic article stated:

In Washington, an advocacy organization called End of Life Washington briefly advised prescribing a drug mixture with the sedative chloral hydrate to about 70 patients. “We know this is going to put you to sleep, and we’re pretty sure it’s going to kill you,” Robert Wood, a medical director at the organization, says they told the patients. It worked, but with a tragic catch: In a few cases, the chloral hydrate burned people’s throats, causing severe pain just at the time they expected relief.

The Atlantic article explains how the assisted suicide lobby did human experiments with a lethal poison cocktail known as DMP. The article continued:

Next, the group had to test the drug. But they still didn’t have a way to follow standard procedure: There would be no government-approved clinical drug trial, and no Institutional Review Board oversight when they prescribed the concoction to patients. The doctors took what precautions they could. Patients could opt in or out, and for the first 10 deaths, either Parrot or Law would stay by the bedside and record patients’ and families’ responses.

The first two deaths went smoothly. But the third patient, an 81-year-old with prostate cancer, took 18 hours to die.The article explains that the group stopped DMP testing, met by conference call and decided to try a new lethal cocktail called DDMP.

The Atlantic article explained how the assisted suicide lobby developed the lethal drug cocktail DDMP, and later DDMP2 that is referred to in the 2018 Oregon DWD report.

An article by Lisa Krieger published by the Medical Xpress on September 8, 2020 also reported on the lethal drug experiments. Krieger wrote:

A little-known secret, not publicized by advocates of aid-in-dying, was that while most deaths were speedy, others were very slow. Some patients lingered for six or nine hours; a few, more than three days. No one knew why, or what needed to change.

"The public thinks that you take a pill and you're done," said Dr. Gary Pasternak, chief medical officer of Mission Hospice in San Mateo. "But it's more complicated than that."

The assisted suicide lobby developed lethal poison cocktails with human trials rather than animal trials. The "developers" appeared concerned with the lethal efficacy and cost of the poison cocktail as opposed to the possible negative consequences associated with the use of the cocktail.

Before legalizing assisted suicide, legislators need to know how assisted suicide is done. 

The assisted suicide lobby doesn't want you to know how assisted suicide is done because death by assisted suicide is not what you think it is.