Which State In The United States Passed A Right To Die Law In 1998?
- Marvin Harvey
1998. The Oregon Health Services Commission determines death with dignity medications may be covered by state funds under the Oregon Health Plan. In the first year of implementation, 16 Oregonians die taking the medication prescribed under the Oregon Death with Dignity Act.
When did the Right to Die start?
Karen Quinlan – The right to die movement in the United States began with the case of Karen Quinlan in 1975 and continues to raise bioethical questions of one’s quality of life and the legal process of death. Karen Quinlan, 21, lost consciousness after consuming alcohol and tranquilizers at a party.
She soon began to experience respiratory problems, which then prevented oxygen from flowing to her brain. That led her to slip into a comatose state in which a respirator and a feeding tube were used to keep her alive and breathing. Quinlan did not have a proxy or living will and had not expressed her wishes if something ever happened to her to those around her, which made it difficult to decide what the next step should be.
Karen Quinlan’s parents understood that their daughter would never wake up and that prolonging her life may be more damaging and it would not be of quality life. Her father sought out the right to be Karen’s legal guardian and petitioned for the removal of the respirator that was keeping her alive.
The court, however, argued that the removal of the ventilator, which would lead to Karen’s death, would be considered unlawful, unnatural, and unethical. Quinlan’s lawyer made the counterargument that the removal of the respirator would allow Karen to have a natural death, which is natural and ethical.
The Quinlans won the court case and were appointed as the legal guardians of their daughter. The respirator was removed in 1976, but Karen continued to live without the ventilator until 1985. The case continues to raise bioethical questions of one’s quality of life and the legal process of death.
It also brings up many important issues that are still being addressed to this day. One of the critical points that the Quinlan case brings up is the patient’s right to deny or withdraw treatment. Cases in which the patient rejected or withdrew treatment were then unheard of and went against medical ethics in preserving one’s life.
Debates on allowing patients the right to self-determination were controversial, and they would be evaluated for the next couple of decades from state to state. The case also brought up whether family members and those who are close to the patient are allowed in the decision-making process.
When did Oregon pass the Death with Dignity Act?
About the Death with Dignity Act – On October 27, 1997, Oregon enacted the Death with Dignity Act which allows terminally ill individuals to end their lives through the voluntary self-administration of lethal medications, expressly prescribed by a physician for that purpose.
Current Report – 2021 (pdf) View All Annual Reports Get Reporting Forms and Instructions Read the Law
Frequently Asked Questions
Why was the Oregon Death with Dignity Act passed?
In 1994, Oregon voters were the first in the nation to approve an act that allows a physician to prescribe a lethal dose of medication to a terminally ill patient for the purpose of self-administration. This practice is called physician-assisted suicide, physician-assisted death, or physician aid-in-dying.
Eligible patients must be adult residents of Oregon whom two physicians determine are able to make and communicate about their own health-care decisions. They also must have a life expectancy of six months or less and are not influenced in their decision by depression or another mental disorder. Patients must make two oral and one written requests separated by fifteen days, and they must be advised of the availability of comfort care and hospice (a program that provides care for people who are near the end of life).
The law prohibits death by lethal injection. The Death with Dignity Act became law in Oregon through a voter initiative that was passed by a slim majority of 51 percent. Implementation was delayed by federal injunction until 1997. That same year, in a second statewide ballot, 60 percent of Oregon voters reaffirmed their support for the law.
Over the next decade, the Department of Justice and the U.S. Congress mounted unsuccessful challenges to the law that were ultimately decided in 2006 by the U.S. Supreme Court in Gonzales v. Oregon, The law requires all prescribing physicians to submit information about patients who request assistance, which the Oregon Department of Human Services publishes yearly.
Between 1998 and 2010, 525 patients died by lethal prescription—usually a high dose of a short-acting barbiturate. In the first decade of the law, the median age of decedents was 70 years; 54 percent were men, 82 percent were terminally ill with cancer, and 86 percent were enrolled in home hospice.
Most Oregonians who have chosen physician-assisted death have a higher-than-average educational attainment, are somewhat younger than other Oregon decedents, and are more likely to be divorced or never married. Only one in ten patients who request a lethal prescription actually die by this method. Barriers include the inability to find a physician willing to write the prescription, or not meeting the legal requirements, and some die during the fifteen-day waiting period.
About two in every thousand deaths in Oregon are hastened through this law. Efforts to legalize physician-assisted death resulted in a vigorous national debate about the ethics and social effects of such laws. Groups who supported the law argued for respect for individual autonomy and compassion for suffering among terminally ill individuals.
Groups who opposed the law expressed concerns that it would disproportionately fall on vulnerable patients who were socially disadvantaged, lacked access to good end-of-life care, felt themselves a social or financial burden to others, or had treatable disorders such as pain or depression. Other opponents feared that the law would be a slippery slope leading to legalization of voluntary active euthanasia (in which an individual requests hastened death and the health care provider administers the lethal medication, usually by injection) and then to nonvoluntary or involuntary active euthanasia (an individual who does not request hastened death dies by lethal injection from a health care provider).
Finally, some opponents argued that, irrespective of social concerns, it was unethical either for a person to take his or her own life or for a physician to assist. Studies of requesting Oregonians, their family members, and their health care providers make it clear that individuals pursue physician-assisted death to maintain a sense of dignity and control, to avoid dependence on others, and to guarantee that they die at home.
- Patients are rarely motivated by financial concerns, inadequate social support, or pain and other physical symptoms experienced at the time of the request, though they are often worried about future pain.
- Although many requesting patients worry that they are a burden to their families, interviews with family members and hospice nurses do not indicate that families feel burden.
There is evidence, however, that some Oregonians who died by physician-assisted death had untreated depression.
What was the first state to legalize death with dignity?
The Oregon Death with Dignity Act (DWDA) was a citizen’s initiative first passed by Oregon voters in November 1994 with 51% in favor.
Where was euthanasia first legalized?
Netherlands, first country to legalize euthanasia.
Is Oregon the only state with death with dignity?
Oregon officials have reached a settlement with a group seeking to allow out-of-state patients to use the state’s Death with Dignity law to end their lives. What does the settlement mean and how will it affect doctors, patients and their families? It’s complicated.
Oregon was the first state to allow its adult residents to voluntarily end their own lives, if they are terminally ill and mentally competent, by self-administering a lethal dose of an approved, prescribed medication. Now it is the first state in the nation that will allow doctors to prescribe the drugs to out-of-state residents.
With a lot of caveats. Oregon is now the first state in the nation that will allow out-of-state patients to use the state’s Death with Dignity law to end their lives. In this May 10, 2019, photo, friends lay their hands on Robert Fuller, wearing angel-themed socks, as he lies unconscious after taking prescribed drugs to end his life, in Seattle.
Elaine Thompson / AP A lawsuit filed in federal court last November challenged the residency requirement. The lawsuit was filed by an Oregon doctor who wanted to provide aid in dying to his patients across the state line in Southwest Washington, and Compassion and Choices, a nonprofit lobbying organization that has pushed to legalize medical aid in dying.
The lawsuit alleged the residency requirement violates Article IV of the Constitution, which prevents states from discriminating against out-of-state residents. The state settled that lawsuit this week, without weighing in on the constitutional claims in the case.
As a result of the settlement, the Oregon Health Authority, the Oregon Medical Board, and the Multnomah County District Attorney ordered their staff to stop enforcing the residency requirement in Oregon’s Death With Dignity Act. In practice, that means that people who wish to use Oregon’s law will not need to obtain an Oregon driver’s license or lease to prove long-term residency before seeking medical help to end their lives.
They will still need to meet the rest of the Death With Dignity Act’s requirements, The Oregon Health Authority has also agreed to propose legislation in the next regular session striking the residency requirement from the Death With Dignity Act. However, the legal safe harbor established by the settlement doesn’t extend beyond Oregon’s borders and is strongest in Multnomah County, where, as part of the settlement, the district attorney has issued his own directive against enforcing the residency rule.
- The settlement agreement in Oregon is just one part of a more complicated legal picture.
- The state’s attorney general, Oregon Health Authority, and Oregon Medical Board all declined to comment on it and have yet to weigh in with any official guidance as to how medical practitioners should interpret it.
The Oregon Medical Association, the state’s largest professional association for doctors, said it is early in the process of reviewing the decision and said it is “trying to understand what that means legally.” Compassion and Choices, however, has issued detailed guidance for doctors, patients, friends and family members helping people who are terminally ill use the law.
The group’s recommendation : people from the 40 states that do not allow medical aid in dying may need to complete the entire process — and their death — in Multnomah County, to ensure their friends and family aren’t at risk of criminal prosecution in their home state. Compassion and Choices also recommends people consult an attorney.
“The main legal issue is for friends and family who help them come to Oregon, or are at their bedside,” said Kevin Diaz, chief legal advocacy officer with Compassion and Choices. And doctors concerned about their liability should limit their conversations with out-of-state patients to answering the question of whether they have provided medical aid in dying to qualified patients in the past.
- Most states have assisted suicide laws on the books,” Diaz said, referencing laws making it a crime to help someone in an act of suicide.
- If they don’t have a corresponding medical aid in dying statute, some of those actions could fall under the assisted suicide prohibition in that home state.” Under the protection in place due to the settlement, qualified non-residents from states where medical aid in dying is authorized, like Washington and California, can get a prescription in Oregon but choose to ingest the medication in their home state, the attorneys say.
“Any risk of legal exposure due to self-ingestion in their home state would be exceedingly low. These states have very similar if not identical requirements,” said Darin Sands, a partner at Bradley, Bernstein, and Sands who worked on the lawsuit. The plaintiff in the case, Dr.
Nick Gideonse, is a family practice and palliative care doctor and associate professor of family medicine at OHSU. About 10 percent of his patients live in Clark County, Washington. Previously, the residency requirement prevented Gideonse from providing medical aid in dying to his Washington patients, even though Washington has a nearly identical law on the books.
He says it’s been difficult to find doctors in Southwest Washington who offer aid in dying. The largest healthcare organization in Clark County, Peacehealth, is a Catholic health system that does not prevent its patients from seeking medical aid in dying but will not participate in it.
Gideonse says he can now provide the service to his Washington patients without being afraid he’ll lose his license. “I can help them in this as I would help them in any other way,” he said. The group Oregon Right To Life has condemned the settlement. It says allowing out-of-state residents to use Oregon’s law increases the risks associated with medical aid in dying — particularly the risk that a doctor will fail to identify a person suffering from depression.
“At least half of the people who received life-ending drugs knew the prescribing physician for less than five weeks,” said executive director, Lois Anderson, citing data in the state’s 2021 annual report on the Death with Dignity Act. “We can only expect this trend to continue as the doors are opened for people outside of Oregon to receive life-ending prescriptions from the physicians here.” In Oregon, about 60% of the people who use the law have cancer.
Ninety-five percent died at home. Medical aid in dying is legal in 11 jurisdictions: California, Colorado, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Montana, Maine, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington. Most of those states have laws modeled closely after Oregon’s. The legal team behind the lawsuit says they hope other states with medical aid in dying laws will review the constitutional argument in Gideonse v.
Brown and consider suspending enforcement of their residency rules.
What happens when someone dies in Oregon?
Heirs and Devisees Defined – Heirs are determined by Oregon law, and not by a will or trust. Generally, the decedent’s spouse is the first heir. If there is no living spouse, then the decedent’s children, as a group, are the heirs. If there are no children, then the decedent’s parents are the heirs.