Spokane7
65°
September 26, 2010 in Opinion, Letters
Suicide like execution
It’s been a year since my uncle opted for assisted suicide. To me it’s an excruciating anniversary. He talked about this for a year before it became law. He’d had surgery for cancer which left him with a catheter. He was depressed at 94 but was home with assistance from friends and health givers. I thought this could never happen because he was just old and depressed.
When the law became reality, friends helped him with his quest. They took him to doctors that my uncle convinced this was what he wanted. His profession had been car salesman so he got the doctors to sign off on him. Friends who were his caretakers tried to talk him out of it, saying it wasn’t right because he wasn’t terminal.
The date was set for the final event. I loved him and wanted to be with him when he died. It felt like an execution.
The details are still painful. Holding him the 25 minutes it took for his heart to stop.
My uncle was the third person to die under the new law. Depressed yes. Terminal no.
My thoughts in that hour: “Father, forgive them; they know not what they do.”
Katie Densley
Wilbur, Wash.
Trudy Rubin: Egyptians say no to Islamists 
Diana on September 26 at 7:03 a.m.
While your grief and loss are understandable, his decision appears to be about doing what he wanted with his life. That is a most personal and powerful decision and is not about you.
knotless on September 27 at 11:26 a.m.
I understand that you are hurt and grieving, but I imagine you have twisted a few details here. I work with people who are terminally ill and I know how difficult it can be for a patient to get a hospice referral, let alone to get two physicians to sign off that the patient is terminally ill for the Death With Dignity Act.
The signs of depression in the terminally ill are often undecipherable from the symptoms of dying: not eating, lack of interest in things that used to be enjoyable, lot of sleeping (or insomnia), etc. Some dying patients do experience depression but the question with the DWD is, does it inhibit a person’s ability to make a rational decision? Have they always indicated this to be their wish, prior to getting a devastating diagnosis? Most people know what they want long before the end arrives.
It is difficult for you to understand his choice, but are you respecting him, his privacy in this most intimate and last decision of his life, by writing this letter to the editor? I would say no. He would probably be very angry to read this.
taylorr on September 28 at 10:07 a.m.
Ms. Densley should be commended for her honest assessment of her uncle’s “choice” or lack thereof, in ending his life. What makes “Knotless” think Ms. Densley has twisted a few details here? An elderly depressed man opts for suicide. Was he ever offered treatment for depression? Or was he too old to be worth the trouble?
He is not “terminal” as required by the assisted suicide statute, yet doctors sign the requisite documentation. So much for the phony safeguards promised by the advocates of assisted suicide.
margaretdore on September 28 at 11:54 a.m.
Thank you for running Katie Densley’s letter providing a rare glimpse into how our assisted suicide law works in actual practice. I am an attorney here in Washington, who has studied our law in some detail.
During the election, voters were promised that their “choice” would be assured. Our act, however, has significant gaps so that patient choice is not assured. For example, no witnesses are required at the death. Without disinterested witnesses, the opportunity is created for someone to administer the lethal dose to the patient without his consent. Even if he struggled, who would know?
For readers interested in more information about assisted suicide, here is a link to my recent article in The Advocate, the official publication of the Idaho State Bar Association, “Aid in Dying: Not Legal in Idaho; Not About Choice.” http://www.margaretdore.com/pdf/Not_Legal_in_Idaho.pdf
Margaret Dore
Law Offices of Margaret K. Dore, P.S.
www.margaretdore.com
1001 4th Avenue, 44th Floor
Seattle, WA 98154
206 389 1754
alisondavis2 on September 29 at 8:07 a.m.
Margaret Dore is spot on. “Choice” can be misleading. I am severely disabled, a full-time wheelchair user, and experience extreme pain, which is unbearable except that I have to bear it, on a daily basis. 25 years ago I decided I wanted to die - a settled wish that lasted over 10 years. Doctors then thought my life expectency was very short. During the first five years I attempted suicide seriously several times. If the “choice” of assisted suicide had been available to me then, as it now is in WA, I would certainly have requested it, and qualified for it.
Had I “chosen” a supposedly “merciful” death then, no one would have known that my doctors’ estimation of my life expectancy was woefully wrong, that my “choice” was not as fixed as it then seemed, and that I would be missing the best years of my life, even though my pain is worse now than it was then.
Yours,
Alison Davis
RMiller on September 29 at 7:17 p.m.
While I am deeply sorry for the loss of Ms. Densley’s uncle, her letter about his use of the Washington Death With Dignity Act (DWDA) raises several red flags.
The DWDA requires two physicians to determine that the patient is terminally ill and has six months or less to live. Given the great care with which doctors approach this issue and the documentation and reporting required to qualify a patient for the DWDA, it is inconceivable that an otherwise healthy person could “smooth talk” two doctors into allowing him to use the law. The word “terminal” can mean different things to different people, but for doctors under the law, it has a very specific definition. If anyone present thought dying peacefully with medication, legally, under the law, was inappropriate, why didn’t they say so?
Additionally, what Ms. Densley describes as feeling like an “execution” almost certainly did not feel that way to her uncle, who made the choice to self-administer medication to hasten his inevitable death. To him, having the medication probably brought peace of mind and control that improved his remaining quality of life.
Finally, Margaret Dore has a long history of fear mongering regarding the DWDA. Here is what attorney Michael Schein who practices civil appellate litigation at Sullivan & Thoreson (and who chaired continuing legal education on the Washington Death with Dignity Act) wrote in the Bar Bulletin: “I read with concern Margaret Dore’s article on the Washington Death with Dignity Act (Bar Bulletin, May 2009). Ms. Dore has every right to oppose the Act based on her religious and/or moral beliefs, but I am afraid that her beliefs have affected her legal analysis.” And this: “Clearly, ample protections are built into the Act. Nor does the Act threaten the most vulnerable. A person does not qualify under this chapter solely because of age or disability. The Oregon experience shows that most people using the Act are well educated, insured and non-minorities.”
Robb Miller
Executive Director
Compassion & Choices of Washington
www.CompassionWA.org
JackieK on September 30 at 5:32 p.m.
Death is inevitable, no one escapes. Wisdom allows us to set people free, respect and support others decisions even is we disagree. No one has the right to make choices for someone else. It is too bad the legal system has to get involved in such an intimate & personal decision. It seems people are so busy worrying about what everyone else is doing and what choices they should make. Seems to me if we worried more about ourselves and checked our own back steps we might be better off. When some one is given a choice, it is an individual choice, not a group choice, unless the individual invites you to participate.
The information between a patient and their doctor is private and is no ones business unless the patient decides to share it. A physician has earned his right to diagnose a patient with the education he aquired. So with out knowing the tests that were performed and all the health care he has recieved, I not sure how someone can accuse the physician, especially if they do not have the same back ground.
I feel bad for the people left behind, I have a lot of sympathy and empathy for them. They lost some one they care about and I know what that feels like. It is heart breaking and lonley.
But time will heal if you let it, as well as enjoying what they left behind for you.
Ending suffering is not execution, it’s setting someone free. I am proud of my volunteer work with Compassion and Choices. It feels good to assist someone with their personal wishes. Infact it is a beautiful & intimate experience. I am honored to have been choosen to help.
Ms Densley, I hope you find love and healing very soon. I send you much love and blessings!!
Jackie K Volunteer for Choices & Compassion
margaretdore on October 03 at 3:50 p.m.
Robb Miller disputes my analysis of our assisted suicide act by quoting Michael Schein’s article in the Bar Bulletin. My response to Schein’s article, published in the Bar Bulletin, is set forth below. I also note that published letters to the editor supported my position 7 to 1.
See: http://www.kcba.org/newsevents/barbulletin/archive/2009/09-07/letters.aspx (scroll past first off topic letter; 6 to 0 supporting me); and http://www.kcba.org/newsevents/barbulletin/archive/2009/09-06/letters.aspx (2 to 1 supporting me; only first letter was against my position).
My published response to Mr. Schein:
http://www.kcba.org/newsevents/barbulletin/archive/2009/09-08/letters.aspx
Michael Schein’s commentary favoring our new assisted-suicide law [Bar Bulletin, July 2009] misrepresents and distorts my article, “‘Death with Dignity’: What Do We Advise Our Clients?”.
Mr. Schein does not, however, dispute that our new law does not require witnesses at the death. Without witnesses, the opportunity is created for someone other than the patient to administer the lethal dose to the patient without his consent. Even if he struggled, who would know? The lethal dose request would provide the alibi.
This scenario would seem especially significant for those patients or elders with money. A California case, 67 Cal Rptr. 3rd 129, 143 (2007), states: “Financial reasons [are] an all too common motivation for killing someone . . .”
Under our new law, a further alibi is provided by the law’s requirement that medical examiners, coroners and even prosecuting attorneys treat the death as “Natural.” http://www.doh.wa.gov/dwda/forms/MEsAndCoroners.pdf. Our new law, so-called “death with dignity,” presents the opportunity for a perfect crime.
Margaret Dore
Law Offices of Margaret K. Dore, P.S.
www.margaretdore.com
1001 4th Avenue, 44th Floor
Seattle, WA 98154
206 389 1754
taylorr on October 03 at 4:41 p.m.
To Robb Taylor,
If your argument is so good, why do you play the religion card?
taylorr on October 03 at 4:43 p.m.
To Robb Miller,
If your argument is so good, why do you play the religion card?
silencedogood on October 04 at 10:45 a.m.
RMiller says:
>>it is inconceivable that an otherwise healthy person could >>“smooth talk” two doctors into allowing him to use the law.
RMiller must have a really good and perceptive and humane doctor, and I’m happy for him. But I’ve spent a huge amount of time in hospitals and clinics, and I’d have to say his experience is the exception, not the rule. The doctors my family and I deal with are rushed and harried, frequently get basic facts about our medical situation wrong, and are and eager to prescribe medication to “fix” things.
I find it *quite* conceivable that a 94-year-old depressed man with a history of cancer could smooth talk two doctors into allowing him to use the law. How sad.