The Sacramento Bee: / Opinion


Another view: The flaws in Oregon's suicide law

By Paul K. Longmore -- Special To The Bee
Published 2:15 am PDT Sunday, April 17, 2005

Paul Longmore is disability advocate and professor of
history and director of the Institute on Disability at
San Francisco State University. He is responding to the
editorial "
California can provide dignity at life's
end," April 10.

Contrary to the assertions of proponents of assisted
suicide and, unfortunately, The Sacramento Bee that
AB 654 and the
Oregon law it models have strong
safeguards, both have dangerous major defects.

Most glaring, though the law requires doctors to document
lethal prescriptions thoroughly, it sets no penalties for
failing to report. The Oregon Legislature did not give
the Department of Human Services (DHS) regulatory authority
or the  resources to detect violations. DHS does not
regularly interview doctors who refused to assist the
patients to die. So most of that mountain of data that
The Bee and proponents have used to justify their position
comes from the doctors who write the death-causing
prescriptions.


Talk about skewing the results! While DHS reports allegedly
show the law's success, the privacy provision makes it
difficult for data to go deeper. Problems with the law's
implementation came to light only because the
Oregon press
interviewed relatives of some deceased patients. DHS
admitted in its first report that it could not determine
whether the practice of physician-assisted suicide was
complying with or violating the law.

Last month, The Oregonian, noted: "
Oregon's Death With
Dignity
Act does not give them \ the necessary authority
to investigate individual assisted suicides" and that
the law's reporting system "seems rigged to avoid finding"
answers to questions about the practice. The promise that
legalization would bring assisted suicide into the open,
regulate it and make doctors accountable has led instead
to physician-assisted suicide practiced in secret and
without oversight.

Advocates also assert that
Oregon's law has vastly improved
pain control. But a Journal of Palliative Medicine study
reported that pain relief for dying Oregonians has
deteriorated. Dying patients in 2000-02 were nearly twice
as likely to be described as suffering moderate or severe
pain during the last week of life as in 1996-97. The
researchers noted that Medicare and Medicaid budget
cuts might be involved, declaring: "The negative impact of
overstretching nursing resources on pain management should
not be underestimated." Since 37 percent of Oregonians who
took the lethal medications depended on those programs, we
must ask if poor pain management prodded them to end their
lives.

Proponents want us to look to
Oregon as a model, where
only successful suicides are reported, there is virtually
no oversight and the actual quality of end-of-life care has
deteriorated. This solution is fatally flawed and should be
rejected.

Paul K. Longmore
Professor, Department of History
San Francisco State University
1600 Holloway Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94132

ph: 415-338-6498 or 415-338-3382
fax: 415-338-7539 or 415-338-0952
e-mail: Plong16141@aol.com or longmore@sfsu.edu