From: jsb@jack.sns.com (Jim Best)
Subject: Death with Dignity Act
Organization: Systems'n'Software
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 92 20:35:56 GMT

                              KNOW THE FACTS
                                   ABOUT
                   CALIFORNIA'S "DEATH WITH DIGNITY ACT"
===========================================================================

In the November election, Californians will be asked to vote on the "Death
with Dignity Act" an initiative which would legalize physician-assisted
suicide  in California. If this initiative passes it would give persons
the "right" to have the assistance of a doctor to cause their death by
administering a lethal injection, poison, or by using other medical
procedures. This would be permitted if the patient has been diagnosed by
two doctors as terminally ill and death is expected to occur within six
months or less

        +------------------------------------------------------+
        | Should this initiative pass, California would be the |
        | first governmental unit in the history of humankind  |
        | to legalize the deliberate killing of patients by    |
        | physicians.                                          |
        +------------------------------------------------------+

Many people today do not clearly distinguish between directly causing
one's own death or another's death and refusing inappropriate medical
treatment at a time of grave illness or approaching death. Phrases such as
"mercy killing," "rational suicide" and "aid in dying" or "death with
dignity" should not be allowed to obscure the fact that euthanasia is
killing an innocent human being. It is morally wrong. No civilized society
should condone it. By so doing we would abandon our responsibility to care
for the frail elderly and incurably ill. As people we should extend
compassion to both the young and old, resolving the despair that leads to
suicide.


As  citizens of a global society we  need        +--------------+
to  fully  understand and  reaffirm  our         | Legalizing   |
basic convictions about the value of each        | euthanasia   |
and  every  human life.  Human life is  a        | violates our |
gift  from God, a gift over which we have        | American     |
only  stewardship, not absolute control -        | convictions  |
which  we are called to preserve and make        | about        |
fruitful.  Our tradition declares a moral        | human        |
obligation  to care for our own life and         | rights and   |
health  and to seek such care for others.        | equality.    |
We are confronted here with a "violation         +--------------+
of the divine law, an offense against the dignity of the human person,
a crime against life and an attack on humanity." If our right to life
is diminished in value, all of our other rights will have no meaning.
To destroy the boundary between healing and killing would mark a
radical departure from long-standing legal and medical traditions of
our country, posing a threat of unforeseeable magnitude to vulnerable
members of society.

Every person is able to decide the level of pain she or he is willing
to accept. EXISTING law already allows the right to refuse unwanted
medical and life-sustaining treatment. The proposed initiative goes
far beyond the existing law of self-determination. Medical treatment
and care settings should provide assistance to patients so that they
may live and die well. A wide range of options are available for the
treatment of pain. Aggressive, in-depth education of health care
professionals regarding these is essential. Families can help persons
find meaning in suffering, and educate the faithful about the issues
surrounding death. Christ gave profound meaning to existence. Death is
not the ultimate evil.

Some would have us believe that there are two options: take the lethal
dose or allow yourself to be subjected to every possible form of "high
tech" medicine no matter how painful, futile or demeaning. This is
simply not so. There are many  real and practical avenues open to help
confront the circumstances of dying and the final decisions that must
be made. Symptom control, pain management and pastoral care coupled
with hospice opportunities and more care are essential to the spiritual
and physical well being of the patient and family.

This initiative, which would legalize physician-assisted suicide in
California is dangerous because....


        O  This  bill does not have any effective  safeguards  to
        prevent serious abuses.

        O  It  allows  for  the   killing  of  patients  who  are
        "competent"  to  make a decision, but does not require  a
        psychological  evaluation of the patients who may only be
        depressed  and  ,  if given time,  would  withdraw  their
        request for euthanasia.

        O  It does not require that any witnesses be present to be
        sure  that  the  patient  truly has  asked  for  assisted
        suicide  when the physician actually puts them to  death.
        Without  witnesses,  there are no safeguards  to  prevent
        mistakes of people dying against their will

        O  It  does not require that the family be  consulted  or
        even  notified of a euthanasia decision.  There would  be
        no opportunity for alternatives to be discussed.

        O  It can not be contained.  It will lead to  involuntary
        euthanasia  of  people  who  are  disabled,  elderly,  or
        mentally ill.

        O  It  will provide subtle coercion over the elderly  and
        frail.   If  asked, "Do you want to die?" many will  feel
        constrained to say "yes" and be disappointed that someone
        did not talk them out of it.

        O   It  does  not  provide   time  for  verification   of
        misdiagnosis.   We  all  know  of  people  who  have  been
        misdiagnosed  but then live for months, even years, after
        being  diagnosed  as "terminally ill." People  mistakenly
        diagnosed will die needlessly.

        O  It  cast doctors in the role of "killers" rather  than
        healers"

        O  There  is no informed consent.  Unlike other  "medical
        procedures"  there  is  no  requirement  that  physicians
        provide  counseling  or  discuss   alternative  forms   of
        treatment.
___________________________________________________________________________
                                   \ /        \  /
I had a seat in the very first row +-------------+ 
I heard it all on my radio         | 0 -(....) 0 |    uunet!jack!jsb
                                   +-------------+                         
___________________________________________________________________________