Terminally ill patients have made waves online lately, but states have rejected efforts this year for more laws allowing them to end their lives.
Bills allowing physician-assisted suicide were introduced in nearly half the states, and while measures may still advance in California and New Jersey, they were either defeated or stalled everywhere else.
The legislative push was fueled partly by a video that went viral in the fall featuring Brittany Maynard, a 29-year-old diagnosed with terminal brain cancer who moved to Oregon so she could take life-ending medication legally. Other terminally ill patients — mostly notably Christian blogger Kara Tippetts — have since countered Maynard’s decision by explaining why they opted against assisted suicide.
It’s not clear whether more states will be persuaded to approve laws allowing doctors to prescribe lethal medications to terminally ill patients, although there’s an effort underway by the group Compassion and Choices, formerly known as the Hemlock Society.
Assisted suicide is allowed in five states, but legislators in 22 states and the District of Columbia introduced bills this year to legalize it — a record number in recent years. Compassion and Choices was a major force behind the uptick, heavily lobbying lawmakers to back such bills.
“It’s a tremendous representation of how this issue is moving forward in and of itself,” said Mickey MacIntyre, the group’s chief program officer.
They haven’t chalked up any legislative successes yet. Connecticut failed to advance an assisted suicide bill for the third year in a row, Colorado legislators voted one down and lawmakers in Nevada, Maryland and other states allowed such measures to die in committee. Some of the measures never advanced at all.
Opponents of assisted suicide were glad to see the defeats, but they’re wary that the movement could gain momentum over the next few years now that some groundwork has been laid.
“The reason why this is such a threat is because [Compassion and Choices] is doggedly pushing for assisted suicide to be legalized in as may states as possible,” said Arina Grossu, director of the Family Research Council’s Center for Human Dignity. “They’re chipping away.”
The public has long been split over whether assisted suicide should be allowed, although polls show that split changing depending on whether the word “suicide” is used. About half of Americans say they would support allowing doctors to assist with suicides, but about 70 percent agree that doctors should be allowed to help a patient end his or her life “by some painless means.”
Both sides in the debate agree that the words used to describe the action have a powerful effect on public opinion — and so do the stories of terminally ill patients who face such decisions.
Compassion and Choices has focused on pushing out stories of patients with life-threatening illnesses. Christina Symonds, a mother of four with Lou Gehrig’s disease, testified earlier this month before one California Senate committee, which approved the bill. Los Angeles lawyer Christy O’Donnell, who has three brain tumors, testified before another state Senate committee.
It’s the stories of those closest to them that affect people the most, MacIntyre says.
“As this issue continues to reach a higher level of visibility, the stories that matter the most are individual stories in individual folks’ lives,” he said. “It’s those stories that are often pressing people forward on this issue.”
But opponents of assisted suicide are irked by the strategies employed by Compassion and Choices and other activists. They point to how the group uses the term “death with dignity” instead of suicide and accuse the group of playing with emotions to sway public opinion.
Grossu won’t even call the group by its name — instead referring to it as “C and C” — because she doesn’t believe it’s compassionate to allow patients to choose to end their lives. While Compassion and Choices argues that allowing terminally ill patients to end their lives on their own terms gives them dignity, opponents insist it undermines the value of human life.
But no matter how much they discredit the group’s arguments, conservatives agree they’ve been somewhat effective. David Prentice, research director for the Charlotte Lozier Institute, said his group is starting to focus on the issue more because it’s gaining more attention.
Charlotte Lozier, which is the research arm of the anti-abortion group Susan B. Anthony List, released a paper on Monday laying out its argument against physician-assisted suicide.
“We’re trying to really look at providing the science and the facts about all of these issues,” Prentice said. “It’s sort of you’re breaking down these barriers to respect for life. It’s a real slippery slope.”
