With Colorado recently legalizing assisted suicide, nearly 20% of all Americans now have the choice to legally end their lives if they are terminally ill, facing death within six months, and meet other eligibility requirements. It is clear that assisted suicide as a political issue is gaining momentum, although its rise has been slow and hard fought.
Beginning in 1977, pollsters at the University of Chicago have annually asked a national sample if a doctor should be allowed by law to end the life of an incurable patient if requested by the family. Since that time, support has remained fairly stable, between 66 and 69 percent. Despite this level of support, many influential organizations continue to oppose efforts to legalize assisted suicide, including disability groups and religious organizations, such as the Catholic Church. Medical organizations, initially universally opposed to the idea, have slowly softened their stance.
In the three most recent areas where it was legalized—California, Colorado, and Washington,D.C.—their state medical societies took officially neutral stances despite past opposition. In Maryland, the situation is the same, and they are preparing their third attempt to achieve legalization. Despite the apparent changes in positions from medical societies, other organizations, particularly disability activists, are strengthening their opposition.
Worried about a “slippery slope,” disability advocates are worried the legalization of this option will lead to its use in situations where a disability is considered a legitimate reason for its use and that disabilities will be seen as preventing one from experiencing a high quality of life, even if the disability is not life threatening. Even in opposition, however, common ground can be found.
Recent studies by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation focused on people who strongly oppose assisted suicide, and they learned that even opponents share areas of interest and concern such as improving palliative care for the terminally ill and how to improve the quality of and access to this care. Shared concerns reach social class, as opponents and proponents both worry about access to improved care being available only to those wealthy who can afford it. Additional areas of shared understanding reached into ethical and existential conversations as well surrounding death, dying, and the psychological aspects of pain and suffering.
Death and dying is a core issue for all human beings, and emotions surrounding the debates are passionate and personal. Several high profile advocates for assisted suicide are those whose lives have been directly impacted by the laws, such as Brittany Maynard, whose husband continues to fight in her name after she moved to Oregon to take advantage of its laws and end her own life on her terms after her terminal diagnosis with brain cancer. Those who have chosen this option often wish to use their very personal choice to promote understanding and support for their cause.
In Utah, 67 year old Gerda Saunders, a retired University of Utah professor, is hoping her case will lead to greater liberalization of existing laws. She is traveling to Europe where more liberal laws will allow her to end her life as she would not qualify in any states where now legal. Gerda was diagnosed with microvascular disease, a disease similar to Alzheimers. U.S. state laws all require the patient to be of sound mind, and have less than six months to live, conditions which very likely would not qualify a patient who will likely lose their mental capacities well before the six month requirement.
The debate surrounding assisted suicide will be a part of the public forum for many years to come. Whether focused simply on legalization, or greater liberalization in application, assisted suicide is an issue that will continue to bring out passionate commitment from those on both sides of the issue, but who are unified by the shared respect for and recognition of the sacred and intimate process we will all experience, the end of our own life.