by Chris Reed | September 1, 2016 11:21 am
Gov. Jerry Brown’s decision to sign the End of Life Option Act on Oct. 5, 2015, triggered elation among the state groups which had fought for years to allow doctors to give people with terminal illnesses lethal doses of drugs to end their lives. A key sponsor — Sen. Bill Monning, D-Carmel — said the law’s enactment “marks a historic day in California.” The law took effect in June and will remain in place for 10 years.
But attempts to block the law have never stopped. Backers of a lawsuit seeking to scrap the measure may have lost the battle last week in a Riverside County courtroom, but they appear to still have a chance to win the war.
In refusing a request for an injunction to put the law on hold, Superior Court Judge Daniel A. Ottolia cited the safeguards touted by its advocates: the requirement that the patient establish his or her mental competence; that the patient have statements from two medical doctors that he or she will die within six months; and that the patient and only the patient can administer the lethal drugs.
Nevertheless, Ottolia let the lawsuit — technically against Riverside County District Attorney Mike Hestrin as the local symbol of the state’s legal system — proceed. The judge concluded that the lawsuit raised enough serious issues that it should not be dismissed.
Plaintiffs include the American Academy of Medical Ethics, the Christian Medical and Dental Society, and six Riverside-area doctors. The argument they made that appeared to resonate the most with Ottolia is that the End of Life Option Act is at odds with the clear intent and plain meaning of another state law meant to provide emergency help to people who are a physical danger to themselves. That law specifies that people with suicidal impulses get professional treatment. A mental competence check-up does not meet this test, according to the plaintiffs’ attorney, Alexandra Snyder, who belongs to the Life Legal Defense Foundation, which is based in Napa.
The plaintiffs’ brief in the case noted that California law holds that helping in or encouraging a suicide is a felony and questions how a doctor can legally counsel someone — even if they are dying — to consider suicide.
The brief also contends the End of Life Option Act does an end run around laws meant to protect ailing older people from elder abuse.
Defenders of the law expressed disappointment that the lawsuit was not thrown out and said that Oregon’s history of allowing “death with dignity” since 1997 had been marked by none of the “hypothetical” abuses warned of by the plaintiffs.
California is the fifth state with such a law.
Besides Monning, the law was also co-sponsored by Sen. Lois Wolk, D-Davis, and Assemblywoman Susan Eggman, D-Stockton. Their legislation was modeled on the Oregon law.
Source URL: http://calwatchdog.com/2016/09/01/death-dignity-law-faces-continued-challenge/
Copyright ©2017 CalWatchdog.com unless otherwise noted.