Showing posts with label Jeanette Hall. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jeanette Hall. Show all posts

Wednesday, February 7, 2018

"Do or Refer": Proponents Show Their True Nature

Margaret Dore, Esq., MBA
By Margaret Dore Esq., MBA

The Massachusetts bill seeking to legalize assisted suicide and euthanasia as traditionally defined, includes a provision requiring doctors to "do or refer," i.e., to perform assisted suicide or euthanasia, by prescribing and/or administering the lethal dose, or to make an effective referral to another doctor, who will do it.  (H 1194 Sec. 15(4)(a) & (b)(iv)).*

The significance of do or refer is that it's anti-patient, by not allowing doctors to use their best judgment for the patient.

Monday, February 5, 2018

"If Dr. Stevens had believed in assisted suicide, I would be dead."

Jeanette Hall and her son Scott in 2000.
By Jeanette Hall

I live in Oregon where assisted suicide is legal. Our law passed in 1997 by a ballot measure that I voted for.

In 2000, I was diagnosed with cancer and told that I had 6 months to a year to live.  I knew that our law had passed, but I didn’t know exactly how to go about doing it. I tried to ask my doctor, Kenneth Stevens MD, but he didn’t really answer me. In hindsight, he was stalling me.

Saturday, September 22, 2012

The Oregon Health Plan Steers Patients to Suicide

Yesterday, the Canadian Department of Justice filed evidence in Leblanc v. Canada, including the affidavit of Oregon doctor Ken Stevens.  Therein, Dr. Stevens talks about his patient, Jeanette Hall.  He also describes how with legal assisted suicide, the Oregon Health Plan steers patients to suicide.  His affidavit concludes:

"The Oregon Health Plan is a government health plan administered by the State of Oregon. If assisted suicide is legalized in Canada, your government health plan could follow a similar pattern. If so, the plan will pay for a patient to die, but not to live."


If assisted suicide is legal in Massachusetts, Massachusetts could also follow Oregon's pattern.

Please find the full text of his affidavit below.  To view a hard copy of his affidavit with supporting documentation, click here

Friday, August 31, 2012

New England Journal of Medicine Article Misleading

Dear Editor

I am a lawyer in Washington State, one of two states where assisted-suicide is legal.  The other state is Oregon, which has a similar law.  Lisa Lehmann's article, "Redefining Physicians' Role in Assisted Dying," is misleading regarding how these laws work.

First, the Oregon and Washington laws are not limited to people in their "final months" of life.[1,2]  Consider for example, Jeanette Hall, who in 2000 was persuaded by her doctor to be treated rather than use Oregon's law.  She is alive today, twelve years later.[3]

Second, these laws are not "safe" for patients.[4][5]  For example, neither law requires a witness at the death.  Without disinterested witnesses, the opportunity is created for the patient's heir, or someone else who will benefit from the patient's death, to administer the lethal dose to the patient without his consent.  Even if he struggled, who would know?  

Third, the fact that persons using Oregon's law are "more financially secure" than the general population is consistent with elder financial abuse, not patient safety.  Do not be deceived. 


* * *

[1]  Margaret K. Dore, "Aid in Dying: Not Legal in Idaho; Not About Choice," The Advocate, official publication of the Idaho State Bar, Vol. 52, No. 9, pages 18-20, September 2010, available at http://www.margaretdore.com/pdf/Not_Legal_in_Idaho.pdf.
[2]  Kenneth Stevens, MD, Letter to the Editor, "Oregon mistake costs lives," The Advocate, official publication of the Idaho State Bar, Vol. 52, No. 9, pages 16-17, September 2010, available at http://www.margaretdore.com/info/September_Letters.pdf 
[3]  Ms. Hall corresponded with me on July 13, 2012.
[4]  See article at note 1.  See also Margaret Dore, "Death with Dignity": A Recipe for Elder Abuse and Homicide (Albeit Not by Name)," at 11 Marquette Elder's Advisor 387 (Spring 2010), original and updated version available at http://www.choiceillusion.org/p/the-oregon-washington-assisted-suicide.html 
[5]  Blum, B. and Eth, S.  "Forensic Issues: Geriatric Psychiatry." In Kaplan and Sadock's Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry, Seventh Edition, B. Sadock and V. Sadock editors.  Baltimore, MD: Lippincott, Williams and Wilkins, pp. 3150-3158, 2000. 

Friday, December 2, 2011

Ken Stevens, MD: "Eleven years later she is thrilled to be alive"

November 27, 2011

To Massachusetts Medical Society 


Dear House of Delegates Officers and Other Interested Parties:

I understand that the Massachusetts Medical Association will be voting on changing its policy against physician-assisted suicide. I have been a cancer doctor in Oregon for more than 40 years.  The combination of assisted-suicide legalization and prioritized medical care based on prognosis has created a danger for my patients on the Oregon Health Plan (Medicaid).

The Plan limits medical care and treatment for patients with a likelihood of a 5% or less 5-year survival.  My patients in that category, who say, have a good chance of living another three years and who want to live, cannot receive surgery, chemotherapy or radiation therapy to obtain that goal.  The Plan guidelines state that the Plan will not cover “chemotherapy or surgical interventions with the primary intent to prolong life or alter disease progression.”  The Plan WILL cover the cost of the patient’s suicide.

Under our law, a patient is not supposed to be eligible for voluntary suicide until they are deemed to have six months or less to live.  In the well publicized cases of Barbara Wagner and Randy Stroup, neither of them had such diagnoses, nor had they asked for suicide.  The Plan, nonetheless, offered them suicide.

In Oregon, the mere presence of legal assisted-suicide  steers patients to suicide even when there is not an issue of coverage.  One of my patients was adamant she would use the law.  I convinced her to be treated.  Eleven years later she is thrilled to be alive.  Please, don’t let assisted suicide come to Massachusetts.

        [Support for this letter regarding Barbara Wagner and Randy Stroup can be found in these articles:  http://www.katu.com/news/26119539.html & http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=5517492&page=1  My patient’s letter in the Boston Globe describing her being alive 11 years later can be read here:
http://articles.boston.com/2011-10-04/bostonglobe/30243525_1_suicide-doctor-ballot-initiative   ]

Kenneth R.Stevens, Jr., MD
Sherwood, OR 
Professor Emeritus and former Chair, Radiation Oncology Department, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon

Tuesday, October 4, 2011

Boston Globe: "She pushed for legal right to die, and - thankfully - was rebuffed

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/letters/articles/2011/10/04/she_pushed_for_legal_right_to_die_and___thankfully___was_rebuffed/

I DISAGREE with Scot Lehigh’s Sept. 23 column, which characterizes assisted suicide as only involving people who are going to die in “a few months or weeks’’ (“Death with dignity in Mass.,’’ Op-ed). I am a retired person living in Oregon, where assisted suicide is legal. Our law was enacted through a ballot initiative that I voted for. In 2000, I was diagnosed with cancer and told that I had six months to a year to live.
 
I knew that our law had passed, but I didn’t know exactly how to go about making use of it. I tried to ask my doctor, but he didn’t really answer me. I didn’t want to suffer. I wanted to do what our law allowed, and I wanted my doctor to help me. Instead, he encouraged me not to give up, and ultimately I decided to fight the disease. I had both chemotherapy and radiation.
 
I am so happy to be alive! It is now 11 years later.
 
If my doctor had believed in assisted suicide, I would be dead. I thank him and all my doctors for helping me to choose “life with dignity.’’
 
Assisted suicide should not be legal. I hope Massachusetts does not make this terrible mistake.
 
Jeanette Hall
King City, Ore.