Protect Yourselves and the People You Care About; Don't Let Them Become Sitting Ducks to Predators

Click here to read the pdf version.

I. INTRODUCTION

I am an attorney and president of Choice is an Illusion, a nonprofit corporation opposed to assisted suicide and euthanasia. I have personally appeared and testified against these practices in 20 US states and also internationally.[1]  

The proposed Act, Raised Bill No. 88, seeks to legalize physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia as those terms are traditionally defined.[2] This will be on both a voluntary and involuntary basis.

The Act is based on similar acts in Oregon and Washington State. I urge you to protect yourselves and the people you care about. Vote “No” to reject Raised Bill No. 88. 

Assisted Suicide Bill HB 5420 Dead for Now

Stephen Mendelsohn

Stephen Mendelsohn:

We still need to be concerned about a special session, but for now, 8 years with no bill passing a single committee.

Story below courtesy of Connecticut News Junkie:

HARTFORD, CT — They never expected it to end like this, but legislative leaders decided Monday that it’s not safe for them to return to the state Capitol before the constitutional adjournment of May 6.

Legislators Need to See Our Tears

Author testifying in 2015

By Cathy Ludlum

American democracy is based on the idea that the voices of the people matter. As legislators struggle with difficult issues, trying to balance the needs of conflicting constituencies and solve complicated problems, they need to hear the perspectives of the people most directly affected.

This is why they listen to hour after hour of in-person testimony. Written testimony has its place. Studies and charts provide important information; but being in the presence of the people, hearing their passion, and sometimes seeing their tears brings us together as human beings and makes it possible for legislators to make the best decisions.

Euthanasia Bill Introduced

On March 2, 2020, assisted suicide and euthanasia bill HB 5420 was introduced and referred to the Joint Committee on Public Health. For the text of the bill click here.

A public hearing was scheduled for March 16, 2020, but was cancelled due to Corona virus concerns.

Reject Act Concerning Aid in Dying (Bill 5898)

 

Margaret and Elaine Kolb

By Margaret Dore, Esq, MBA

1. The Act 

The Act seeks to legalize “aid in dying,” a traditional euphemism for active euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide.[1] 

2. Who May Be Most at at Risk?

Individuals with money, meaning the middle class and above. 

CONNECTICUT COURT DISMISSES “AID IN DYING” CASE

By Margaret Dore

On June 2, 2010, the Connecticut Superior Court dismissed Blick v. Connecticut, an "aid in dying" case.  "Aid in dying" is a euphemism for physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia.[1]  As used in the case, aid in dying refered to physician-assisted suicide.

Case History

In Connecticut, assisting a suicide is prohibited by two statutes: Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-54a, which prohibits intentionally causing a suicide "by force, duress or deception"; and Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-56, which prohibits intentionally causing a suicide "other than by force, duress or deception." Neither statute contains an exception for physician-assisted suicide.

On October 7, 2009, the former Hemlock Society, now known as Compassion & Choices, announced the lawsuit.  The claim was that § 53a-56 does not reach a physician who provides "aid in dying" because aid in dying is not "suicide."  See Verified Complaint, ¶ 40.  The complaint also implied that the patients at issue would be "dying." This would not necessarily be the case. See Opinion letter here:  http://www.euthanasiaprevention.on.ca/ConnMemo02.pdf.

On June 2, 2010, the Court dismissed the case.  The Court specifically disagreed with the claim that "aid in dying" is not "suicide."  The Court stated: 

"[T]he legislature intended the statute to apply to physicians who assist a suicide and intended the term "suicide" to include self-killing by those who are suffering from unbearable terminal illness.

The language and legislative history of § 53a-56 compel the conclusion that the defendants [state’s attorneys] would not be acting in excess of their authority if they prosecuted the plaintiffs under § 53a-56 for providing 'aid in dying.'"[2] 

The Court also stated that the claim was not justiciable and that any change in the law would be a task for the legislature.[3]  The Court said that the legislature's participation was particularly important given "significant . . . concerns" about physician-assisted suicide.[4]  These concerns include whether assisted suicide "threatens . . . the poor, the elderly and the disabled."[5]

The Court also found that the lawsuit was barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity.[6]  The Court concluded: "The case is hereby dismissed because it is barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity and, as stated above, it presents a nonjusticiable claim, one which must be decided by the Connecticut legislature, and not by the court."[7]

Not Dead Yet’s running commentary on the case can be viewed here.  The verified complaint, the parties’ briefing and the Court’s decision can be viewed below as indicated:

Verified Complaint, filed October 2009.

Memorandum in Support of Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, dated November 19, 2009.

Plaintiffs’ Memorandum of Law if Opposition to Motion to Dismiss, dated January 4, 2010

Reply Memorandum of Law in Support of Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, dated February 11, 2010.

Memorandum of Decision on Motion to Dismiss, dated June 1, 2010 and filed on June 2, 2010 (dismissing the case).

---

[1]  The term, "aid in dying" means both euthanasia and assisted suicide.  See the "Model Aid-in-Dying Act" published in the Iowa Law Review at: http://www.uiowa.edu/~sfklaw/euthan.html.  Note the letters "euthan" in the link.  The Act's definition of "aid-in-dying" describes euthanasia.  Section 1-102(3) states: "‘Aid-in-dying’ means . . . the administration of a qualified drug for the purpose of inducing death." See also video transcript of Barbara Wagner,
http://www.katu.com/news/26119539.html?video=YHI&t=a (last visited Sept. 24, 2010) ("‘physician aid in dying’ [is] better known as assisted suicide").
[2] Blick & Levine v. Office of the Division of Criminal Justice, et. al. (Blick v. Connecticut)(Conn. Super. Ct), CV-09-5033392, Memorandum of Decision on Motion to Dismiss, filed June 2, 2010, at 25. 
[3] Id., Memorandum of Decision on Motion to Dismiss, at 16, middle paragraph.  
[4] Id., at bottom.
[5] Id., at 17.
[6] Id., at 21-25. 
[7] Id., at 26.