Major Assisted Suicide Win in Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

By Barbara Lyons

We are thrilled to announce that a favorable decision was reached in Kligler v. Healy by the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts which rejected the notion that there is a right to assisted suicide in the Massachusetts Constitution.  

Here is a key phrase from the decision:

Although we recognize the paramount importance and profound significance of all end-of-life decisions, after careful consideration, we conclude that the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights does not reach so far as to protect physician-assisted suicide.3 We conclude as well that the law of manslaughter may prohibit physician-assisted suicide, and does so, without offending constitutional protections.

The Legislature Should Reject S1384, Which Despite Its Name Does Not Provide Dying People "End-of-life Options."

By John Kelly

Over the last 15 years, the Massachusetts's legislature and, in 2012, the people of the state, have wisely rejected the legalization of assisted suicide as too dangerous. The legislature should likewise reject S1384, which despite its name does not provide dying people "end-of-life options."

The tragic reality is that under legalized assisted suicide, some people's lives will be ended without their true consent, through misdiagnosis, persuasion, coercion and abuse, insurance denials and depression. No safeguards have ever been enacted or proposed that can prevent this outcome, which can never be undone.

NPR reported five years ago that up to 20% of people who enter hospice outlive their six months prognosis. In Oregon, 4% of people who enter the assisted suicide program are alive at the end of six months. The difference between 4% and 20% is the percent of people and their families who may have lost months, years, and in some cases decades of meaningful life.