A personís right to die is as contentious an issue in American politics as the death penalty or Roe v. Wade; but, in November 2016, 65 percent of Colorado voters supported a personís right to choose his or her own end-of-life option, with the passage of Colorado End of Life Options Act, Proposition 106.Colorado joined California, Oregon, Vermont and Washington in passing a Death with Dignity statute, according to DeathWithDignity.org. ìThis is a very personal issue, and itís a personal choice,î said Holly Armstrong, a Colorado-based consultant for Compassion and Choices, the national nonprofit organization that provided support to the campaign. She also worked as a communications director for Proposition 106.According to the Colorado End of Life Options website, Proposition 106 ìauthorizes the medical practice of aid in dying,î allowing a ìterminally ill, mentally capable person who has a prognosis of six months or less to live to request, obtain and ñ- if his or her suffering becomes unbearable ñ- self-administer medication that brings about a peaceful death.îModeled after Oregonís long-standing Death with Dignity Act implemented in 1997; according to Proposition 106, patients must meet several eligibility requirements before the medication can be prescribed. Among those requirements: Eligible candidates must be an adult diagnosed by at least two physicians as having a terminal illness, with six or less months to live; the candidates must be fully informed of all their options for care; and must be determined to be of sound mind.ìWe knew early on that if voters had the information about what Proposition 106 is, and what it does and doesnít do, they would vote for it,î Armstrong said. ìIt is both a challenge and an opportunity to understand what this means (for patients). Just because you support (Proposition 106) doesnít mean that you would use it or that you would want your loved ones to use it. It simply means that you understand that someone should have a choice.îOpponents of the bill fear that offering a medical-aid-in-dying option means that some people or entities could take advantage of patients.Jeff Hunt, director of the Centennial Institute at Colorado Christian University, led the fight against Proposition 106. Hunt did not respond to interview requests.In an article, titled, ìVoters to Decide Legality of Physician-Assisted Suicide in Colorado,î published Oct. 21, 2016, by Rachel del Guidice of ìThe Daily Signal,î Hunt said, ìIn Oregon and Washington State, where physician-assisted suicide is already legal, individuals with terminal illnesses are getting letters from their insurance companies that are saying, ëYour medication is too expensive for us to continue your coverage. However, we will pay the $100 for you to terminate your life through doctor-assisted suicide.íîPeggi OíKeefe, a spokeswoman for Vote No on Proposition 106, the coalition opposed to the initiative, agreed with Huntís concerns.In an article titled, ìWhy You Should Vote No on Proposition 106, Regarding End-of-Life Options,î written by Michael Roberts and published in the ìWestword” Oct. 21, 2016, OíKeefe pointed to the disabled community as patients who could be taken advantage of by their medical insurance companies.ìThis is a community thatís already devalued by the medical system,î OíKeefe told ìWestword,î a Denver newspaper. OíKeefe also claimed insurance companies in Oregon sent notification to patients that their treatments were rejected while ìassisted suicidesî were covered.Matt Whitaker, the multi-state implementation director with Compassion & Choices who is helping implement Proposition 106 in Colorado, said that the concerns were carefully considered in the drafting of Oregonís Death with Dignity act more than 20 years ago, and also with Coloradoís Proposition 106.ìThis was a real concern, how to make sure people have the option to choose but make sure the already disadvantaged are not taken advantage of,î Whitaker said. ìThe law is clear, and Oregonís law has not seen a change in 20 years.îIn the Westword article, OíKeefe said one of the flaws of Proposition 106 is that it relies on poor physician prognosis accuracy.ìAs we know, physicians make mistakes,î OíKeefe said. ìWeíve all heard stories where someoneís been given six months to live and they go on to live for two years longer, four years longer, even 10 years longer.îWhitaker somewhat agreed.ìPhysicians are notoriously bad at diagnosing a prognosis, but in the opposite way,î Whitaker said, ìThey overestimate in a lot of cases Ö thatís the reason why there are two physicians involved. These are people who are incredibly sick. Theyíre suffering unbearably. Theyíre not trying to pre-empt anything. Having this medication is about a sense of control, so that if the pain does get unbearable, they have the option to use it.îAccording to the ìWestword” article, OíKeefe said Proposition 106ís requirement that a patient be verified as mentally sound is flawed because the billís language does not require a patient to be reviewed by a mental health professional.Whitaker said, ìThere is a process of a person having the capacity to make an informed medical decision. People do that all day, whether itís their decision to stop dialysis or turn off a pacemaker.îBallotpedia, a nonpartisan American political database, reported that locally, the Colorado Catholic Conference, the Archdiocese of Denver, the Roman Catholic Diocese of Colorado Springs, Colorado Christian University and Focus on the Family, among others, worked to fight Proposition 106.Focus on the Family, a global nonprofit Christian ministry headquartered in Colorado Springs, did not return interview requests.Addressing concerns that Proposition 106 is akin to suicide, Armstrong said, ìIt is written into the law that this is not suicide, and thatís a very clear distinction. Suicide and mental health issues are very serious and should be treated as such. Suicide is a very different medical and health issue. Hospice care and other end-of-life care are generally enough for patients, but there is a small percentage of people for whom that doesnít alleviate their suffering. This isnít either/or. Itís really about what your options are as youíre in this situation.î
