RadioBDC Logo
Let's Go | Matt & Kim Listen Live
Ballot Questions | 2. Physician-Assisted Suicide
Summary
This proposed law would allow a physician licensed in Massachusetts to prescribe medication, at a terminally ill patient’s request, to end that patient’s life.

To qualify, a patient would have to be an adult resident who:
> is medically determined to be mentally capable of making and communicating health care decisions,
> has been diagnosed by attending and consulting physicians as having an incurable, irreversible disease that will, within reasonable medical judgment, cause death within six months, and
> voluntarily expresses a wish to die and has made an informed decision.

The patient would ingest the medicine in order to cause death. The patient, directly or through a person familiar with the patient’s manner of communicating, would have to orally communicate to a physician on two occasions, 15 days apart, a request for the medication. At the time of the second request, the physician would have to offer the patient an opportunity to rescind the request.

The patient would also have to sign a standard form, in the presence of two witnesses, one of whom is not a relative, a beneficiary of the patient’s estate, or an owner, operator, or employee of a health care facility where the patient receives treatment or lives.
Arguments
YES – ALLOW PHYSICIAN-ASSISTED SUICIDE
(Written by Heather Clish of Reading, Dignity 2012)
http://www.yesondignity.com/


When my father was diagnosed with brain cancer, he had little time left. As his final days neared, he chose to use the Death with Dignity law in his home state of Oregon.

The Massachusetts version, like those in other states, will allow mentally competent adults with no chance to survive their illness to take life-ending medication prescribed by a physician.

My dad knew he wanted to die in the comfort of his own home; competent and aware instead of detached and sedated; on his own terms instead of those of a fatal disease that had already taken too much.

My dad was already dying, but because of this law, he could say goodbye to those he loved, with dignity and grace in my mother's arms.

I urge you to vote "Yes" because, while this choice isn't for everyone, everyone has the right to this choice.

These arguments, from the secretary of state's election website, were written by proponents and opponents of each question and reflect their opinions.

Boston.com, The Boston Globe, and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts do not endorse these arguments, and do not certify the truth or accuracy of any statement made in these arguments.

The names of the individuals and organizations who wrote each argument, and any written comments by others about each argument, are on file in the secretary of state's office.
NO – DO NOT ALLOW PHYSICIAN-ASSISTED SUICIDE
Written by The Committee Against Physician Assisted Suicide
http://www.stopassistedsuicide.org/


Question 2 restricts patients' choices and control by enabling suicide as a substitute for quality health care.

Question 2 is poorly written, confusing, and lacks even the most basic safeguards.

Patients would not be required to see a psychiatrist before obtaining the lethal drug. Many patients with a treatable form of depression could get a life-ending prescription, rather than effective psychological care.

Also, the proposal lacks any public safety oversight after the fatal drug is obtained.

Question 2 does not require a consultation for palliative care, a compassionate form of care that eliminates pain and maximizes quality of life for the terminally ill.

And eligibility is based on a six-month life expectancy. Doctors agree these estimates are often wrong. Individuals can outlive their prognosis by months or even years.

Massachusetts should improve access to quality health care for terminally ill patients, not access to suicide.

Vote no on Question 2.

These arguments, from the secretary of state's election website, were written by proponents and opponents of each question and reflect their opinions.

Boston.com, The Boston Globe, and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts do not endorse these arguments, and do not certify the truth or accuracy of any statement made in these arguments.

The names of the individuals and organizations who wrote each argument, and any written comments by others about each argument, are on file in the secretary of state's office.