This afternoon I joined about 30 people in a small conference room at the Unitarian Universalist church complex on Porter Lake Drive in Springfield.  We watched a short HBO documentary titled “The Last Campaign of Governor Booth Gardner,” about the campaign to pass aid-in-dying legislation in the state of Washington (at that time, aid-in-dying was only available to residents of Oregon).  The movie’s portrayal of the behind-the-scenes political maneuvering was fascinating, and I came away with great admiration for the Governor.  I also thought that the filmmakers were very careful to be impartial.  Governor Gardner obviously campaigned in favor of aid-in-dying, but opponents were given equal screen time.

After the screening, the Compassion and Choices Mass State Director Marie Manis spoke to our group, giving us a brief update on the status of legislation across the country.  As of today, aid-in-dying has been legalized by statute in four states: Oregon, Washington, Vermont, and California; it was authorized by the Court in Montana.  In seventeen states, legislation has been filed; in Colorado, a ballot question will be voted on this November.

In our state, House Bill 1991, also called the “Massachusetts Compassionate Care for the Terminally Ill Act,” was referred to the Committee on Public Health in the previous session of the General Court.  With 39 sponsors, H.1991 has not yet been reported out of committee.

Massachusetts Compassion and Choices led the campaign to pass this act by ballot initiative (Question 2) in 2012.  Although polls indicated that there was majority support for the initiative, outside groups came in with a blitz of television ads in the final weeks which doomed the initiative (it failed 51-49).  A group has to wait 5 years for another opportunity to file for a ballot initiative, which means that C&C could try again in 2017, but that is not an election year.  Thus C&C is pushing ahead on the legislative front with the House Bill 1991.  Legislators need to hear from constituents before they will state their position either way.  We were urged to contact our state representatives and voice our opinions on this matter.

People often misunderstand what this bill will actually do.  To summarize, a person must be an adult, a state resident, fully mentally competent, and be declared terminally ill (meaning that death is expected in six months or sooner–the diagnosis is based on the person’s disease and what doctors know about the disease progression).  The person has to take the medication him or herself; a physician is not allowed to administer it.  Most importantly, this option is NOT available to the chronically ill, thus, it seems that the concerns of the disabled community about the bill are unfounded.

I agree that we need to think more broadly about death and dying; the intent of this type of legislation it to provide more options for meeting people’s needs at end-of-life.  As the C&C declares in its mission statement, the organization aims to

• empower people with information and tools, including our free consultation program, to receive healthcare that is consistent with their values and priorities as they approach the end of life,
• advance policies that allow people to make fully informed decisions about their healthcare, such as improving hospice and palliative care and ending unwanted medical treatment,
• authorize and implement medical aid in dying to allow mentally capable adults in their final weeks or months of a terminal disease to advance the time of death and end unbearable suffering.