The Case for the California Compassionate Choices Act

Support for the California Compassionate Choices Act is based on the simple premise that people should be free. Specifically, that when they are terminally ill and death is near, they should be free to decide whether to prolong life as long as possible, or to end their suffering more quickly.

Patients' Right

First and foremost, AB 374 is about protecting patients. Terminally ill patients, mostly suffering from cancer and other incurable diseases, want the right to have some measure of control at the end of their lives. The Compassionate Choices Act places the power to choose solely in the hands of the terminally ill patient.

"It is my choice to have no more invasive treatments and no more hospital stays. I want the option to hasten my death when life becomes unbearable."
—Polly Crouch, terminally ill cancer patient

Seniors

Leading senior activists support the Act because they cherish the freedom and autonomy it protects. Says Gary Passmore, director of the California Congress of Seniors, "Seniors deserve the peace of mind of knowing that they will be able to make a critical choice about their final days."

Medical

"The issue is patients' rights, patients' choice, love and compassion for the dying person and respect for that person's wishes."
—Dr. Dick Ikeda, founder and director of Health for All clinics

The bill is widely supported in the California medical community because it empowers physicians to respect the wishes of their patients. More than 1,500 California physicians support the California Compassionate Choices Act.

As Dr. C. Ronald Koons, ethics committee chair at the UC Irvine Medical Center told members of the Legislature, "I believe it is our responsibility to listen to our patients; and if medically, morally and legally possible, provide them with the comfort they request. It should be the patient's decision and physicians should honor their choice."

Clergy

A broad array of clergy men and women support the act. The more than 300 religious leaders in support include clergy from the United Church of Christ, Jewish, Methodist, Baptist, Episcopalian, Presbyterian, Unitarian and Lutheran faiths, and a Jesuit Catholic scholar.

Rev. John Brooke of the United Church of Christ speaks for them when he says, "Our faith in God does not require us to prolong people's needless suffering."

Disability Does Not Qualify a Patient Under Compassionate Choice Act

This bill treats individuals with disabilities the same as everyone else. It simply protects their freedom should they become terminally ill. Above all, individuals with disabilities cherish their freedom and autonomy. The mission statement of the disability advocacy group Autonomy, notes, "We believe that people with disabilities, who have struggled to control their own lives and bodies, must be allowed to maintain this control and autonomy throughout their lives, and especially at its end."

Oregon Experience is a Documented Success

Oregon 's aid in dying law has been a tremendous success. In its first seven years, only 325 dying people requested, and 208 self-administered, medication to hasten their imminent death, a tribute to the law's stringent safeguards.

The Oregon law is also credited with increasing referrals to hospice care, improving the quality of pain management services, and encouraging physicians and families to have early and honest discussions about honoring the wishes of dying patients.

Patients, Voters and Physicians Support Compassionate Choices

Polling has consistently shown that large majorities of Californians favor the concepts of AB 374. National and California polls of patients, physicians and the general public show majority support for aid in dying.

The Field Poll in March 2005 reported that 70 percent of Californians agree that "incurably ill patients have the right to ask for and get life-ending medication."

Repeated public opinion surveys over the past 20 years have documented strong support, with more than two-thirds of Californians supporting end of life choice.

Majorities of every major religion, including Roman Catholics (65%), and ethnic group support compassionate choices. (The California Poll, 3/2005)

Editorials

Major newspapers across California support AB 374, because of the compassion it shows for the terminally ill. "Those who are dying deserve a say in the worth, or the untenability of their last days," editorialized the Los Angeles Times. The San Francisco Chronicle, the San Jose Mercury News, the Sacramento Bee and many others wholeheartedly agree.

Please Visit Our Editorial Page

Myths: Why Opponents are Wrong

Opponents consistently make false arguments about the California Compassionate Choices Act.

* They deliberately use the scary and misleading word "suicide" to imply that the law would somehow cause the deaths of healthy people. The bill applies only to people whose deaths are already imminent.

* They claim that it would allow doctors to "kill" people. It allows only those already dying to request a prescription and then choose to self-administer medication to hasten their deaths when they feel their suffering has become unbearable.

* They claim it singles out seniors and the disabled as people of lesser value. It treats those groups the same as all other California residents; it protects their freedom should they become terminally ill.

* They claim greedy HMOs will choose to reduce costs by encouraging death. The safeguards in the bill ensure only the patient can make the request and must control the process from beginning to end. Patients must take their medication themselves.

Download the PDF

Vea este sitio en Español

TAKE ACTION NOW!

Contact Your Lawmakers Today & Tell Them You Want Their Support!