The American media are utterly uninterested in the many problems that have been reliably reported with Oregon assisted suicide. Instead, they take the facile “statistics” published each year by the state at face value–interview some supporters of PAS–and then blithely assure that all is well.
But a UK paper, reacting to the ongoing debate in the UK in which Oregon is being touted as proof that assisted suicide is A-OK, reports that all is not well. From the story:
But opponents say the legislation introduced in Oregon – the first state in America to allow doctor-assisted suicide – simply does not work. And it’s not just the experience of lumberjack Mr Prueitt that supports their argument. They point to the fact that although the rules require those handed the lethal prescriptions to have a life expectancy of only six months, some who subsequently decide not to kill themselves have gone on to survive for a year-and-a-half more. Or even longer.
Critics warn that because many doctors refuse to participate, patients end up shopping around for the handful of physicians willing to prescribe. It makes it all the more likely the person who is writing the prescription will neither know the patient nor provide an impartial assessment of them. It is also said that those suffering from depression, a condition that can impair decision-making, are rarely excluded from the process as they should be. But perhaps most worrying of all, say critics, is the trend for other treatment to be denied to those who are terminally ill. Instead of being given the medicines that might prolong their lives, they are being offered £30 to cover the cost of drugs that will end their days in a matter of hours.
How refreshing: A long story that details the many problems in Oregon that most media and its supporters prefer to ignore. Check it out. There is a lot of important and interesting information there that you will rarely see in any American paper.
August 9th, 2009 | 8:22 pm
[...] bad as Wesley J. Smith notes it takes a foreign newspaper to do a long article on the problems with the Oregon plan. Tags: [...]
August 10th, 2009 | 1:44 am
The “many problems” in Oregon? If there are any we can thank those wonderful folks who like to mind other people’s business. It appears that the strategy of the anti-assisted-suicide crowd is to sabotage its implementation as much as possible so they can then proclaim “it isn’t working.” It’s the same technique used by the opponents of embryonic stem cell research: they prevent the research from going forward, and then announce: “See, it hasn’t produced any cures.”
August 10th, 2009 | 3:05 pm
Once again, great art on the blog!
Why did it take UK journalists? Because he UK didn’t elect Obama.
HW: I understand your concern about sovereignty. But isuicide isn’t suicide when it’s assisted, and it’s the assisted suicide proponents who are minding everyone else’s business. I know you can’t help it and that you mean no harm; liberals just have trouble thinking straight.
August 10th, 2009 | 3:10 pm
As for embryonic stem cell research, I’m not against it and personally I don’t care whether it’s moral or not; but even those who’ve been doing it have said it doesn’t work and anyway why bother with it when other forms of stem cell therapy work BETTER. Objectively, I can say this, though: when something isn’t moral it also is a real bad idea not only because it isn’t moral but also because it doesn’t work, and in fact what isn’t moral doesn’t work and can’t work and isn’t supposed to work. Similarly, I couldn’t care less about the foetus, but I oppose abortion because it’s not good for the woman who does it; if she does it anyway she shouldn’t be reproduced in the first place.
August 20th, 2009 | 12:35 am
But isuicide isn’t suicide when it’s assisted, and it’s the assisted suicide proponents who are minding everyone else’s business.
Brilliant, Ianthe. Or as I say, “They are trying hard to make it our business.”
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact