The Medical Aid in Dying Act goes into effect in New York next week. The issue has proven controversial for a significant group of New Yorkers.
There are conditions to be met, but at its core, the law allows people who are terminally ill and believed to have less than six months to live to ask for medication aiding in their death.
What You Need To Know
The Medical Aid in Dying Act goes into effect in New York on Aug. 5
The legislation allows people who are terminally ill and believed to have less than six months to live to ask for medication aiding in their death
State leaders included what the governor’s office calls “additional guardrails that will make sure people won’t be taken advantage of”
Opponents say the government giving a green light to terminally ill people wanting medical assistance in their own death is not something being taken lightly.
State leaders included what the governor’s office calls “additional guardrails that will make sure people won’t be taken advantage of,” but there are different thoughts on the legislation.
“We remain vigorously opposed to the bill. We think that it’s going to be very dangerous and it’s going to, you know, represent a seismic shift in health care,” said Kristen Curran, the New York State Catholic Conference’s director of government relations.
“We as a society, we do what we can to prevent suicides. So why are we doing the medical profession? Doctors are there to preserve life, to heal and not to end life,” said Rabbi Yeruchim Silber, director of New York Government Relations for Agudath Israel of America.
Concerns regarding sanctity of life are not just found in Judeo-Christian beliefs.
Gareth Fisher, associate professor and chairperson of the Department of Religion at Syracuse University, said while there are varying perspectives among Buddhists, a traditional view would include stopping suffering by controlling one’s own desire and understanding the implications aid in dying could have on rebirth.
“You’re not going to escape from that cycle of suffering by taking your own life. You’re just going to make things worse, and you’re still going to be alive somewhere. You may have even more suffering,” Fisher said.
Curran said concerns go beyond moral opposition, noting the potential future implications this could have on vulnerable populations.
“People sort of scoff at the slippery slope argument, but all you have to do is look at the facts,” she said. “Look at Canada, who started out again, much like us, with a sort of narrower law. And actually assisted suicide is a leading cause of death in Canada.”
An advocate for the law said those who have beliefs making them not want to participate should not have to, but he feels that concept goes both ways.
“We also don’t believe that the religious views of some should be able to stop other people from using a law if they so desire,” said Death With Dignity National Legislative Consultant Geoff Sugerman.
These viewpoints, while direct, were shared with compassion for those who are terminally ill.
Curran said the state needs to offer more end-of-life care.
“That goes back to the hospice and palliative care. There have been bills floating around to promote awareness, to improve access. And so we’re always going to be fighting for those, those positive things,” Curran said.
Silber said he would like to see changes in the law – for it to include that medical aid in dying listed on death certificates, and for some sort of assurance that the lethal drug given to the patient does not go anywhere else.
According to the state Department of Health, the eligible patient must be capable of self-administering the medication, as the act needs to be “a voluntary and deliberate choice.”