Misconceptions about right-to-die legislation

As a physician, I feel it is critical to address inaccuracies and unsubstantiated concerns cited in a recent op-ed about medical aidin-dying legislation that is pending here in Illinois. It is medically incorrect to equate suicide by people with unresolved mental health issues with mentally capable, terminally ill adults (not children), who typically have exhausted all treatment options for an incurable disease and just want the option to peacefully end unbearable suffering in the last days of their lives.

U.S. medical aid in dying laws are not comparable to Canada’s euthanasia law, which does not require self-administering the medication and is not limited to mentally capable, terminally ill adults. The Illinois End-of-Life Options for Terminally Ill Patients Act includes a dozen safeguards modeled after the practice of medical aid in dying over the last quarter century in 10 U.S. states. In each of those states, there has never been a single substantiated case of the practice involving coercion, including people living with disabilities.

For example, a Journal of Medical Ethics report about the Oregon Death with Dignity Act concluded: “Rates of assisted dying in Oregon ... showed no evidence of heightened risk for the elderly, women, the uninsured ... people with low educational status, the poor, the physically disabled or chronically ill, minors, people with psychiatric illnesses including depression, or racial or ethnic minorities, compared with background populations.”

In addition, a federal court recently dismissed a lawsuit claiming California’s revised medical aid in dying law, which reduced its waiting period from 15 days to 48 hours, coerces people with disabilities into using this option. The ruling concluded: “... a terminally ill patient’s decision to request aidin-dying medication — and accordingly, to not participate in or seek the benefits of other public health services — is voluntary.”

Finally, there is no financial incentive for insurers to coerce patients into using medical aid in dying, because they already stopped receiving expensive, extensive or intensive treatment, and typically are enrolled in relatively inexpensive hospice care. That’s why a New England Journal of Medicine study concluded there are no substantial cost savings for choosing medical aid in dying over other end-oflife care options. The legislation specifically prohibits insurers from denying or altering health care benefits based on aid in dying care.

That’s why I proudly support the Illinois End-of-Life Options for Terminally Ill Patients Act.

Diane Schaar, M.D., Burr Ridge