Choice’s Elastic Definition of “Terminal Illness” and “Intolerable
The assisted suicide ideologues at Compassion and Choices–formerly the
Hemlock Society–pretend that their agenda is very limited and
constrained, merely a teensy-weensy safety valve for use when nothing
else can be done to relieve suffering. That’s all phony, baloney of
course. The ultimate agenda is expansive, well beyond the actively
Proof of this is found in answers to interrogatories C & C filed in
connection with its Montana lawsuit, that asked its definition of a
“terminally ill adult patient,” who the complaint claimed had a state
constitutional right to assisted suicide. Usually, as in Oregon,
means 6 months or less to live regardless of the medical treatment
available to the patient. But C & C’s definition for Montana turns
that more precise definition on its head. From its interrogatory answer
# 4 (no link, my emphasis):
The term “terminally ill adult patient,” as used in
means a person 18 years of age or older who has an incurable and
irreversible condition that, without the administration of
life-sustaining treatment, will in the opinion of his or her attending
physician, result in death within a relative short time. The definition
is not limited to any specific set of illnesses, conditions or diseases…
In other words, the patient won’t die even if he or she receives life
sustaining or curative care, but if no such care is rendered.
That’s a very elastic definition. Think about it: If a
diabetic refuses insulin, he will die within “a relatively short time,”
but if he takes insulin, could live for decades, a full life span.
Ditto, AIDS patients taking the viral inhibitors, cancer patients
receiving chemotherapy, patients on kidney dialysis, perhaps even
psychiatric patients who are not suicidal only because of anti
Also, get their description of “intolerable dying process,” for which
assisted suicide is the supposed remedy:
This is a subjective determination made by the
based upon his or her medical condition, and circumstances, symptoms,
and personal values and beliefs.
In other words, it is whatever a patient says it is at the time he/she
wants to commit suicide. Such looseness over who qualifies makes
impossible any meaningful controls over assisted suicide–which of
course is the point.
C & C are very cagy. But in Montana, they have shown more of
true colors, for example, disdaining the kind of “protective
guidelines” put into Oregon and Washington law. So be very clear,
assisted suicide agenda is not narrow. It is very broad.
here–unlike their counterparts overseas–just generally lack the candor
that would permit us to have a true debate about the means and ends of
the ultimate assisted suicide/euthanasia agenda.
Contact: Wesley J.
December 2, 2009
to a friend.
The IFRL is the largest grassroots pro-life organization in
Illinois. A non-profit organization, that serves as the state
coordinating body for local pro-life chapters representing thousands of
Illinois citizens working to restore respect for all human life in our
society. The IFRL is composed of people of different political
persuasions, various faiths and diverse economic, social and ethnic
backgrounds. Since 1973 the Illinois Federation for Right to Life has
been working to end abortion and restore legal protection to those members of the
human family who are threatened by abortion, infanticide and euthanasia. Diverse though we are, we hold one common belief - that
every human being has an inalienable right to life that is precious and must be protected. IFRL is
dedicated to restoring the right to life to the unborn, and protection
for the disabled and the elderly. Click here to learn more about the IFRL.