(Oregon Right to Life) — Pro-life medical and mental health professionals and advocates for the medically vulnerable shared powerful testimony Monday opposing a new bill that would dramatically expand assisted suicide in Oregon. The small minority who testified in favor of the legislation argued the bill was a necessary update to the state’s existing law and “not radical at all.”
On Monday, March 3, Oregon’s Senate Judiciary Committee held a public hearing at the state Capitol on Senate Bill 1003, which would lower guardrails in Oregon’s narrowly-passed 1994 “Death With Dignity Act” (DWDA).
As Oregon Right to Life has reported, SB 1003 would cut the state’s 15-day waiting period to a mere 48 hours; allow physician assistants and nurse practitioners, rather than only physicians, to facilitate assisted suicide; and require require hospices and hospitals to publicly disclose whether they participate in assisted suicide, making it easier for vulnerable people to be directed toward those facilities. The 2023 removal of the state’s residency requirement means SB 1003’s implications would extend to people across the country who might travel to Oregon for a lethal prescription.
More than one hundred and sixty people – including medical and mental health professionals and the Vice President of Government Relations for the Oregon Medical Association – submitted written testimony opposing the bill, and only three people submitted written testimony in favor. Over 700 pro-life Oregonians also sent messages to their state senators in opposition to the legislation.
READ: Oregon Medical Professionals Present Strong Opposition to Radical New Assisted Suicide Bill
Dozens of pro-life people from across the state – from Medford to Portland to the Oregon coast – assembled at the Capitol building in Salem on Monday to advocate for the medically vulnerable, wearing stickers with the message: “Care, not killing.”
Two individuals gave oral testimony during the hearing supporting the legislation, and seven gave testimony opposing it.
Those who spoke in favor of the legislation argued that the bill was necessary to improve Oregon’s existing law, expand access to rural areas, and even prevent “do-it-yourself” suicides.
Dr. Paul Kaplan, speaking on behalf of End of Life Choices Oregon, argued that the provisions in the bill to allow non-physicians to facilitate assisted suicide were necessary because medical care is often handled exclusively by nurse practitioners and physician assistants in the rural parts of Oregon. According to Kaplan, without expanding the authority of non-physicians to prescribe lethal medication, assisted suicide “is literally not available for people who live in those areas.”
Salem resident Laurel Hines, the only other proponent of the legislation who gave testimony Monday, argued that the bill was “not radical at all.” Calling the bill’s provisions, including the virtual elimination of the 15-day waiting period, “extremely reasonable,” Hines said “a lot of doctors refuse to participate [in assisted suicide] for religious reasons” and went on to argue that SB 1003’s “changes aren’t radical enough.” She said that people will resort to “do-it-yourself” options, including the use of firearms, without access to “a good Death With Dignity law.”
But proponents of SB 1003 were squarely in the minority.
WATCH: Oregon Senate Judiciary Committee Holds Public Hearing on Senate Bill 1003
In her testimony opposing the bill, Oregon Right to Life lobbyist and political director Sharolyn Smith said the content of SB 1003 is “deeply personal” to her, and urged the committee to reject the legislation.
“My dad is disabled, has lived with chronic pain for over 20 years, and recently received a terminal diagnosis,” Smith told committee members. “Despite having a strong support system, he still struggles with feeling like a burden. That’s why I fear what SB 1003 could mean for people like him. Instead of affirming his value, this bill makes it even easier for a broken health care system to suggest death as the answer. My dad – and every patient like him – is valuable and deserves true care and support no matter their diagnosis or ability.”
“We must reject policies that pressure people into thinking their lives are worth less because of a medical diagnosis,” she said.
Jessica Rodgers, Coalitions Director for Patients Rights Action Fund, said the issue was also “particularly personal” as a “native Oregonian” and as “a social worker and as a caregiver for my mother when she had stage 4 ovarian cancer.” She said the measure “invites abuse,” pointing out that “conditions here in Oregon like anorexia and diabetes qualify for physician assisted suicide.” She urged the committee to reject SB 1003.
[Article continued after photo]
[Article continued]
Pro-life Republican Rep. E. Werner Reschke, who represents Oregon’s 55th District, told committee members that “Senate Bill 1003 is a bill with moral significance that compels me to be here.” He decried what he called Oregon’s “culture of death over life,” and said people in the state increasingly lack optimism about the future.
“We need a thriving, robust, and hopeful people,” he said. He argued that Oregon lawmakers should utilize their resources in delivering those positive outcomes for people, not working to expand access to assisted suicide. Reschke also spoke about his own mother’s illness and the way his father cared for her in her final days.
“Eventually she couldn’t speak, but her mind was clear as day,” Reschke said. “And every day my dad sat at her bed and cared for her and loved her until the last day she couldn’t breathe anymore. Colleagues, that’s dignity.”
Sister Veronica Schueler, a Catholic nun who testified on behalf of the Archdiocese of Portland, told the committee that “Oregon should be a sanctuary where every human being is valued and protected.”
“We feel that Senate Bill 1003 is not the answer for Oregonians,” she said. According to Sister Schueler, the reduction of the waiting period “makes no sense” and “doesn’t allow for an adequate investigation into the patient’s situation.”
Sharon Quick, MD, MA (Bioethics), President of the Physicians for Compassionate Care Education Foundation, said that “determining how near someone is to death … is a difficult prognosis that specialists frequently get wrong.”
“This bill sets up death by ableism, devaluing vulnerable patients who are suffering from disabilities,” she said.
Dr. Angela Plowhead, PsyD, a licensed psychologist who specializes in cognitive and decision-making capacity assessment, noted that the reduced waiting period jeopardizes patients whose consent cannot be adequately assessed, increasing the risk of people choosing assisted suicide as a result of coercion.
“Oftentimes, decisions to go down the route of assisted suicide have to do with others’ discomfort with the process [of natural death], even more so than your own,” Plowhead testified.
“If we think that some lives are less worth living, that’s just discrimination,” Dr. Brick Lantz, M.D., told the committee. “We need true compassion.”
SEND A MESSAGE: URGE YOUR SENATOR TO OPPOSE SENATE BILL 1003
Following the March 3 public hearing, the Senate Judiciary Committee will determine if they will schedule SB 1003 for a work session. At the work session, they would vote on whether to advance the bill in the legislature.
Oregon Right to Life is closely tracking SB 1003 and will keep pro-life advocates informed of any movement. Visit ortl.org/action to view and engage with Oregon Right to Life’s action alerts.
Oregon Right to Life supports the sanctity of human life from the moment of conception until natural death. We oppose all cases of euthanasia, whereby a person is deliberately killed through direct action or omission even if that act is by their permission. Read the full statement and all our position statements here.
