fact and fiction

There's a lot of misinformation that ideological opponents of death with dignity would have you accept as fact. Below, we've got their rhetoric and the reality organized topically with some quick links to the most frequently offered arguments against death with dignity. If you have a topic of concern you'd like to see addressed, email us here and watch for it in the future. Get the real story:

The law is a slippery slope; people will use it when they may have years to live

Death with Dignity Opponents Say:

The Truth:
Oregon's law is a slippery slope toward euthanasia Oregon's law is specifically written to ensure that terminally ill patients remain in control of their dying process. Since Oregon's law was implemented there have been no efforts to expand the law beyond its stringent self-administration guidelines. The Death with Dignity Center will oppose any such efforts. This law works because

1. It operates within the confines of the doctor-patient relationship

2. The patient is the driving force in the process, and

3. The person who ultimately administers medication.
Many people are told they have a few months to live but then are still alive years later; the law encourages people to act too soon.

Nobody wants to die. The experience in Oregon has demonstrated that the terminally ill people, who sought help from a physician to hasten their deaths, did so while fighting to make the most of every day. If an extended recovery were possible, that individual would not even think of using the law, as they would want to make the most of the time they've been given. People in extreme situations for whom recovery is no longer possible use the law as a last resort when each day becomes more and more unbearable.
Outlawing physician-aid-in-dying will prevent it from happening. Physician-hastened dying happens in every state, every day. Laws will not prevent terminally ill patients from seeking an end to their suffering, nor will they prevent some doctors from quietly helping. Laws can only be used to protect patients and physicians by regulating the practice - ensuring no abuse occurs.
Families will coerce terminally ill loved ones into using the law. The law clearly states that if there is any evidence of coercion the process must be stopped. Physicians, working closely with terminally ill patients and their families ensure that this will not be a concern.


Proper pain management makes death with dignity unnecessary

Death with Dignity Opponents Say:

The Truth:
Proper pain management can alleviate a patient's desire for a hastened death. Even the most ardent opponents of Oregon's law admit that for 5% of terminally ill people even the best pain care will not alleviate their suffering. The sad truth is that the actions of the DEA means that even the 95% of terminally ill people who could have their pain managed adequately, risk not getting good pain care because doctors will fear DEA investigation. In addition, pain is only one element in this complex problem. For many terminally ill people, it is the loss of dignity and autonomy - the suffering beyond pain - that becomes intolerable

People can hasten their deaths through terminal sedation and dehydration just as easily as with Oregon's law.

Terminal sedation and dehydration is a legal way to end your life in all 50 states. In this scenario, the patient stops eating and drinking. The doctor provides sedation so that the patient does not feel the effects of starvation and dehydration. The process can take up to two weeks and there is no consciousness due to the excessive sedation. The prescriptions used under Oregon's law usually render the patient asleep within a few minutes and death usually comes within a few hours, if not sooner. You decide which is more humane.


The law will undermine important health care and medical services

Death with Dignity Opponents Say:

The Truth:

Hospice utilization will decrease as patients choose assisted dying.

In Oregon, hospice referrals and use actually increased to about 32%, almost double the national average and higher than any other state.

Patients will no longer be able to trust their physicians to do everything possible to cure them.

In fact, many people in Oregon are having conversations about this issue with their doctors while still in good health. Doctors in Oregon have done everything their patients have wanted to prolong life, and have been allowed to fulfill some patients' final wishes when suffering became unbearable. Many Oregonians want to know their doctors will not abandon them if their suffering becomes intolerable and will work with them should they decide to choose death with dignity.


Law will result in people taking their lives who are not terminally ill

Death with Dignity Opponents Say:

The Truth:
Oregon's law contributes to a "culture of death."

Oregon's law has brought peace of mind to many terminally ill patients who more often than not say something like "I don't know if I'll use the law, but knowing it is there as an option gives me the strength to go on." If that's not life affirming, what is?
Disabled people will be encouraged to use the law. No one is encouraged to use the law. The law is in place for terminally ill people whose suffering is intolerable and who wish a humane and dignified death. The law is rarely used in Oregon but it does supply real comfort to many people who see it as an option - if they need it. There are many disabled people who support the Oregon law.
The poor, undereducated, uninsured, racial minorities and other marginalized people will be encouraged to use the law. No one is encouraged to use the law. Oregon's experience indicates that the people who chose to use the law are well educated, have had excellent health care, good insurance, access to hospice and were well supported financially, emotionally and physically.


The law doesn't have adequate reporting and safeguards

Death with Dignity Opponents Say:

The Truth:

Doctors don't have to report under the Oregon law. Therefore we really don't know how many people have used it or how successful it has been.

Doctors cannot qualify for the law's "safe harbor" provisions if they do not report use of the law to the Oregon Department of Human Services. A doctor that does not report to DHS would be subject to reprimand.
Oregon is the only state where physician-aid-in-dying occurs. Every day in every state, doctors are quietly responding to patients' pleas for help in hastening death. The difference in Oregon is that it is done legally, in the open, and it is carefully regulated to ensure the patient, family and caregiver are protected. Oregon's law was written specifically because proponents learned this practice was happening and wanted to make sure it was properly regulated to protect those involved.

HMOs and insurance companies will encourage people to use the law.

These decisions are made between patients and doctors, in consultation with family. No HMO or insurance company is ever involved with these decisions and were they to be, it would qualify as coercion, which is strictly prohibited under the law.
People will move to Oregon to hasten their death. The law requires terminally ill patients to be residents of Oregon. There is no evidence that anyone has moved to the state expressly to use the law.


The law allows people to "play God"

Death with Dignity Opponents Say:

The Truth:
Dying is a process and Oregon's law circumvents that process and the potential for closure and healing that might occur between the patient and their family or friends. Oregon's experience demonstrates that these processes are not circumvented and that the support of family and friends in the final days is often enhanced. Goodbyes are said and often, family and friends are gathered with the patient when they slip peacefully into sleep. The people choosing to use the law have been facing death for years and are asking to use the law only as a last resort; there is no evidence of anyone "rushing" the process.
Oregon's law is tantamount to "playing God," only God should determine when we die. Modern medicine has become adept at prolonging life and unfortunately, continues to treat death as a failure. With all the technology and treatment options in healthcare today, it is often only the suffering and death that is prolonged - not a superior quality of life. People who might be stuck in the prolonged suffering of a terminal illness and whose belief systems allow them to choose a hastened death, are no more playing God than the people who suggest that one more procedure, one more pill, one more tube might make the difference.

People can hasten their deaths through terminal sedation and dehydration just as easily as with Oregon's law.

Terminal sedation and dehydration is a legal way to end your life in all 50 states. In this scenario, the patient stops eating and drinking. The doctor provides sedation so that the patient does not feel the effects of starvation and dehydration. The process can take up to two weeks and there is no consciousness due to the excessive sedation. The prescriptions used under Oregon's law usually render the patient asleep within a few minutes and death usually comes within a few hours, if not sooner. You decide which is more humane.


Federal laws already prohibit death with dignity

Death with Dignity Opponents Say:

The Truth:
The Controlled Substance Act (CSA) enables the federal government to overturn Oregon's law. The Controlled Substances Act is a federal law, which governs the trafficking of illegal substances like cocaine, and ensures that narcotics are used for legal medicinal purposes and not diverted for other use. Oregon's Death with Dignity law allows for the legal use of controlled substances and therefore the CSA does not apply. Further, it is the states, not the federal government that determines what is legitimate medical practice. Oregonians determined through two elections and several federal court cases that death with dignity is a legitimate medical purpose, meaning that as long as physicians operate under the law, they are protected.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled against physician-aid-in-dying in Oregon. The U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear a challenge to Oregon's law, thus allowing the law to go into effect on October 27, 1997. In two cases argued earlier that year, the court found no federal right to physician-aid-in-dying but encouraged an "earnest and profound debate" about the issue. Furthermore, the Court determined that the issue was more appropriately decided by the individual states. Oregon has made its decision.

Defend dignity. Take action.

You are the key to ensuring well-crafted Death with Dignity laws for all Americans. With your financial and volunteer help, the Death with Dignity National Center, a 501(c)(3), non-partisan, non-profit organization, has been the leading advocate in the death with dignity movement. Member contributions helped us pass a new Death with Dignity law in Washington, defend the Oregon law, and provide education and outreach programs for the vitality of the death with dignity movement.

donate today

Stay Connected

Sign up for the latest news and information about Death with Dignity.

Additional ways to stay in touch:

TwitterFacebookRSS

About Death with Dignity

The greatest human freedom is to live, and die, according to one's own desires and beliefs. From advance directives to physician-assisted dying, death with dignity is a movement to provide options for the dying to control their own end-of-life care.

Death with Dignity National Center is the leader in this movement, successfully establishing, advancing and defending the landmark Oregon and Washington Death with Dignity Acts.

Learn more about our family of organizations.

Political Action Fund

Capitol BuildingThe Death with Dignity National Center partners with the Oregon Death with Dignity Political Action Fund to conduct lobbying and political activities in order to achieve the enactment of Death with Dignity laws in other states.

Learn more about the Oregon Death with Dignity Political Action Fund.

Patients & Families

family timeThe Death with Dignity National Center was formed out of a profound commitment to the idea that personal end-of-life decisions should be made solely between a patient and a physician. We are pleased to provide you with support and information as you face the difficult challenges ahead.

Find resources for patients and families.

Research Center

person studyingWe have compiled a comprehensive collection of legal briefs, journal articles, and newspaper clippings. We invite you to explore the wide array of information we have collected throughout our history.

Dive into the archives of the National Center.