My frequent readers know that of the causes that I champion here in Albany, the choice to medically end one’s life if terminally ill is at the top of the list. There are two forms of medical orders that I completely support.
- Nonhospital Order Not to Resuscitate (DNR Order)
- Medical Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (MOLST)
I have written an entire section of this website about all of this and I invite you to read it. Before going forward, I should point out that, at least for me, the DNR and MOLST orders are a dignified way to end one’s life if that person is terminally ill.
Let me be clear: this is not about going through a depression cycle and feeling suicidal. This is about dying with dignity. Other states have it, so why not New York state? It’s your life, it’s your dignity. It’s a matter of medically aided suicide. That may sound awful, but is it really?
The proposed law is gaining traction. Thankfully, the bill has passed through the Assembly and the Senate is poised to vote on the issue as soon as next week. Hopefully, it will clear the Senate and at that point, it will go to Governor Hochul’s desk and, if she does the right thing, she will sign it into law.
As you might imagine, there are naysayers. It should come as no surprise that the Catholic Action Network is issuing a call to arms, begging citizens to do pretty much whatever they have to do to make their voices heard by our state’s Senators.
In an email newsletter sent out a couple of hours ago, they stated:
“The New York State Assembly has passed legislation to legalize physician-assisted suicide. Now, it’s in the hands of the State Senate—and they will decide in the next few days whether to bring this dangerous bill to a vote.
Senate Bill 138 would allow doctors to prescribe lethal medication for the express purpose of ending a patient’s life. This threatens the safety and dignity of vulnerable New Yorkers, including the elderly, people with disabilities, and those facing emotional or financial distress. Suicide is not medical care.
We must act immediately to stop this. Senators need to hear from their constituents now, before they decide whether to move this bill forward.”
Bold emphasis is theirs as is the entirety of their emailed statement.
I take exception to the fact that the proposed law is “dangerous.” If it became law, there would be a series of steps that would need to be taken. For example, I wouldn’t be able to walk into my doctor’s office, tell him I want to die and then have it happen all in the same visit. That’s not what it’s about and it never has been.
They go on to call New Yorkers who want this bill to pass “vulnerable,” and they say that the bill is an affront to “safety and dignity,” knowing full well that it is neither of those things. This is about dying with dignity when one is going to die with or without intervention.
Wouldn’t the humane thing to let people choose dignity over pain and misery? I’m sorry that the CAN doesn’t really care about you or how “vulnerable” you are. All they care about is forcing their religious beliefs on others. That’s what it comes down to, folks.
In the interests of full disclosure, I should state that I am a Catholic. What I “should” be doing is joining ranks with the CAN to do whatever I can to make the bill fail. But I’m not going to do that. This may put me at odds with the Church and with my parish’s priests. I am prepared for that talk.
Yes, I’m a Catholic, but I will not force my beliefs on anyone. In this case, my beliefs conflict with my religion, but I honestly do feel that people should have the right to decide what they do with their bodies. Call it “physician assisted suicide” all you want, but this is absolutely nothing of the sort. The CAN wants to distract you with buzzwords and fear tactics.
People who are involved with the Catholic Action Network should be ashamed of themselves with this undignified, inhumane and hateful behavior. I do not support the CAN nor do I defend their way of doing business. It is my hope that they are ashamed of themselves and, in time, I hope that they’ll see that they’re on the wrong side of history.
“Together, we can protect every human life and reject this dangerous and deadly policy,” their email message states. It is neither “dangerous” nor is it “deadly.” If I am terminally ill and I choose to avail myself of a law such as this, then that is my business. I get to decide whether not an option available to me is full of danger or is dangerous.
Even though they don’t deserve to hear their side of the story heard, I have reached out to the CAN for a comment, and if they provide one, I will update this article.