In her November 13th “The New Old Age” column, respected authority Paula Span writes of ongoing work to expand access and remove barriers to accessing medical aid in dying in the nine states with aid in dying laws.
Most notably she describes a federal lawsuit filed by Oregon doctor Nicholas Gideonse to strike down the residency requirement of Oregon’s aid in dying law.
“Last month Dr. Gideonse, backed by pro bono lawyers and Compassion & Choices, an advocacy group for expanding end-of-life options, filed a federal lawsuit claiming that the residency requirement for Oregon’s aid-in-dying law is unconstitutional. ‘I realized how important this could be for patients seeking access,’ he said.
“The lawsuit is one of several legal and legislative efforts around the country to reduce the requirements that patients must contend with in order to receive aid in dying. In some states, lawmakers have already broadened the types of health care providers that can participate, or have shortened waiting periods or allowed waivers.
“‘I think of it as MAID 2.0,’ said Thaddeus Pope, an end-of-life bioethicist at Mitchell Hamline School of Law who tracks such actions, referring to the acronym for medical aid in dying. ‘We found out there’s an access problem…We set all these safeguards and eligibility requirements and they locked a lot of people out.
“Oregon led the shift in easing access, amending its law in 2019. The state previously required patients to make two verbal requests for life-ending medication, at least 15 days apart, to ensure that they had not changed their minds. Now, if the patient is unlikely to survive that long, their doctor can waive the 15-day waiting period.
“‘Fifteen days is everything when you are suffering,’ said Kim Callinan, the president and chief executive of Compassion & Choices, which supported the change. ‘People who are eligible for the law are hitting roadblocks and barriers.’”