A Connecticut bill that would have permitted physicians to assist patients to commit suicide and, its critics say, eliminated penalties for any person who may have pressured another individual to commit suicide using the legislation’s provisions, has died in committee.

The highly controversial legislation failed to pass the Judiciary Committee Wednesday, ending hopes for a floor vote, reported the Hartford Courant.

“The co-chairs of the Judiciary Committee announced in advance that the bill did not have enough votes to pass but permitted legislator discussion instead,” Family Institute of Connecticut’s (FIC) Leslie Wolfgang, whose organization opposed the measure, reported. “So, a motion was never made and the bill died in Committee without a vote.”

A bill to legalize assisted suicide has now come before the Connecticut legislature, and failed, more than a dozen times.

Like most assisted suicide bills, SB1076 was touted by its champions as a measure of “compassion” for the terminally ill, but its critics pointed out the legislation lacks strong protections from abuse.

The bill would have allowed terminally ill patients who are 21 years and older, who are considered mentally competent and who have been determined to have six months to live, the right to receive lethal drugs to end their lives.

According to NBC Connecticut, state lawmakers said SB1076 contains “stronger safeguards including an increase in the age eligibility and a one-year residency requirement, among others.”

“Some will say that these guardrails have become barriers and others will say that the law does not go far enough to protect the vulnerable,” said State Sen. Saud Anwar (D-South Windsor), chairman of the Public Health committee.

“SB1076 not only would have permitted doctors to assist others to commit suicide, it would have sneakily removed penalties for any person who pressured another person to commit suicide using the provisions of the bill,” wrote FIC’s Wolfgang. “It also removed penalties for physically assisting someone’s suicide, akin to euthanasia.”

A “Fact vs. Myth on SB1076” page on the FIC website observed “SB1076 does NOT have strong protections,” and added:

There are many alternatives to suicide for those who suffer, but to be clear … this bill has other problems. SB1076 permits any other person to speak for the patient, it relies on experimental drug combinations, permits someone else to administer the drugs, no notification to the next of kin and more.

FIC noted in February that opponents of the legislation “had the upper-hand again at a Connecticut public hearing on Monday, February 27th, with over 258 written testimonies submitted against SB 1076 versus 190 in favor (that is over 57.5% opposed).”

Connecticut State Rep. Treneé McGee (D-West Haven), an outspoken pro-life Democrat who claims there are many other “black pro-life women across the world,” asserted her opposition to SB1076 in an op-ed April 18 at the New Haven Register.

“Expanding access to quality, affordable health care is central to the quest for racial justice, which is one of many reasons I stand in strong opposition to proposed legislation that would create government-assisted suicide in Connecticut,” McGee stated, observing that “public policies” should be focused on improving health care for the seriously ill, rather than opening up the possibility that they should become victims of those who would abuse legally assisted suicide.

The state lawmaker explained:

Today, the poor, vulnerable and disabled are falling prey to legalized assisted suicide in places where it is legal. Poverty takes away autonomy, choice and self-determination. Disabled citizens, whether they suffer from mental or physical challenges, are particularly at risk to intimidation or suggestion.

McGee cautioned that rising healthcare costs are “driving people into poverty,” which is one of the top reasons why people seek out assisted suicide.”

“Additionally, the role of insurance companies in medical decision-making creates an environment where assisted suicide will be abused,” she noted as well, asserting the creation of “government-assisted suicide” would eliminate “bodily autonomy” from the poor and vulnerable and hand it over to “government and corporate interests.”

“Assisted suicide does not offer more choice to patients — it takes choices away,” McGee wrote. “We cannot accept life and death decisions at the hands of government and corporate interests that leave us exposed and more susceptible to abuses in the system.”

– – –

Susan Berry, PhD is national education editor at The Star News Network. Email tips to [email protected]
Photo “Peter Wolfgang” by FICLIVE.

Sign up here to get your copy of The Star News Network Daily Update

Daily updates, breaking news, special offers, and more

CONFIRM

Thank you for signing up!