Time running short for ‘aid-in-dying’ bill
With just a month left in the legislative session, supporters of a bill that would allow terminally ill patients to determine when they might die is in a race with the calendar.
After clearing the General Assembly's Public Health Committee in a 22-9 vote last month, the 33-page bill, which outlines safeguards and responsibilities for physicians and patients, is likely to get referred to the Judiciary Committee, where the legislation expired without a vote last year amid bipartisan opposition.
This year, however, proponents of the aid-in-dying bill think they have some new momentum that maybe, for the first time since the legislation was introduced back in 1994, there is hope for people who want to avoid the painful final stages of terminal illness and end their lives while there is still some quality.
Proponents will likely find out early next week on the further review in the law-writing Judiciary Committee, where supporters including state Sen. Saud Anwar, D-South Windsor, co-chairman of the Public Health Committee, plan to convince colleagues on the 39-member panel to approve it and send it to the floor of the Senate.
“There are parts of the bill that are very crucial, from a legal perspective,” said Anwar, a physician, in a Friday phone interview. In recent years, hundreds of people have provided public testimony on the legislation and more than a few of them came to the end of their lives without legislative action, including Kim Hoffman, 59, of Glastonbury who died in January after an eight-and-ahalf-year battle with ovarian cancer.
“This is one of the bills that nearly every year we have individuals like Ms. Hoffman, who plead to try to get the Connecticut legislature to have some recognition, empathy and understanding of their pain and suffering,” Anwar said. “There are many more than that who died. I hope my colleagues in the Judiciary Committee will have the kindness to listen. It is the dying wish for so many people who say that while they might not make it, they want to make sure others don't suffer, and they're requesting us as a state to do the right thing.”
Gov. Ned Lamont on Thursday said he supports aid-in-dying legislation, but it first has to pass the Senate and House before it reaches his desk.
In recent years, the Connecticut State Medical Society has shifted from opposing the legislation, to supporting the individual decisions of doctors. “All humans are hard-wired to protect everyone's life, especially doctors, whose training is about saving lives,” said Anwar, noting that with the legal “guardrails” in the legislation, only those ptients whose doctors believe they have six months or less to live would be eligible.
Only a tiny percentage of patients would fall outside of current palliative and hospice care protocols, Awar stressed.
“This is an important bill,” he said. “Many people have spoken over hundreds of hours, and I hope my colleagues will be thoughtful rather than vote based on internal biases.”
State Rep. Steve Stafstrom, D-Bridgeport, cochairman of the Judiciary Commission, said Friday that in 2021, it was bipartisan opposition in the panel that showed there wasn't enough support to bring it to a committee debate and vote. “Last year, when we caucused the bill and did a vote count, it was short votes by a pretty clear margin, with no Republican support and a very mixed reaction from Democrats. If it comes again we'll likely caucus it again.”
The Judiciary Committee's deadline is Monday afternoon to finalize bills that originated in that committee. Once a bill is referred to it from another committee, there are only a few days to review legislation, and it can expire without action. Time is growing short in the 12week budget-adjustment session that ends at midnight the night of May 4.
And with State Supreme Court Justice Christine Keller announcing her move to senior status, it means that Gov. Ned Lamont will want to quickly nominate another member to the high court. Nominees are scrutinized by the Judiciary Committee before votes in the House and Senate.
Sen. Will Haskell, who is also a member of both the Judiciary and Public Health committees, said Friday that when he was first elected in 2018, he hadn't thought much about aid-indying. “It's one of those things that you get to know through your constituents,” Haskell said. “We have let these people down by not passing aid-in-dying in previous legislative sessions. This really deserves a vote, one way or the other, in Judiciary.”
“My gut says people who are of sound mind deserve the choice,” said state Rep. Jason Doucette, D-Manchester, whose father's painful death from cancer in March 2021, helped change his mind. “I was someone who was raised Catholic. Although now I am not a practicing Catholic, I have always had a doubt about this issue that I would attribute to that.” Palliative and hospice care did not help his father. “For around the last five months of his life, he expressed on a daily basis his desire to end his life and we had to suffer along with him. That sort of crystalized it for me.”
“We should have trust in patients that they can make this determination, and we should trust these physicians who care for these patients,” said Timothy Appleton, state campaign director for the Compassion & Choices Action Network, an advocacy group. Ten states plus the District of Columbia have aid in dying, or physician-assisted suicide laws, the nearest being New Jersey.
“We're only seeking one more option on the continuum of the end-of-life care,” Appleton said in a phone interview Friday. “This isn't new legislation. It is absolutely unconscionable that someone in Middletown, Connecticut has fewer options than someone in Middletown, New Jersey. These are real people who seek out just one more option. I cannot express enough that this is an urgent matter of life and death. For some, having an option under certain circumtances doesn't impact those who don't' want that option. Right now the government is deciding how we should die in this state.”