Kate Christensen Speaks with Pat Matheny, a Recipient of 
Lethal Medication under Oregon's Death with Dignity Act

Oregon is the only state in the United States where a physician may legally prescribe a lethal dose of barbiturate for a patient intending suicide. The Oregon Death with Dignity Act was passed by voters in 1994 and came into effect after much legal wrangling in October of 1997. At the same time, a cabinetmaker named Pat Matheny was struggling with progressive weakness from amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, or ALS. I met with Pat and his family for a lengthy interview in October 1998 in Coos Bay, Oregon, for a television news report on his decision to get a lethal prescription. Below is an extract from that interview. On the day this introduction was written, 10 March 1999, Pat took the prescribed lethal overdose of barbiturates and died at home. His illness was taking his voice, he could not move his hands or legs, and breathing was becoming very difficult. His mother told me he knew that was “the right time” for him.

Download Full-text

Death With Dignity: A Policy Analysis

Innovation in Aging ◽

10.1093/geroni/igab046.240 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 5 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 63-63

Author(s):

Zainab Suntai

Keyword(s):

Low Income ◽

Policy Process ◽

Terminal Illness ◽

Right To Die ◽

Death With Dignity ◽

Policy Goals ◽

Oregon Health ◽

Death With Dignity Act ◽

The Right ◽

Dignity Act

Abstract Death with dignity is one of many titles attributed to the practice of providing a patient with terminal illness a means to die in light of extreme suffering as a result of a terminal illness. The purpose of the Oregon Death with Dignity Act is to provide individuals suffering from a terminal illness with the right to make a written request for life-ending medication to end their life in a “humane and dignified manner.” Deborah Stone’s policy goals of equity, efficiency, welfare, security, and liberty provides a framework to analyze whether a policy is doing what it says it wants to do. As such, the goal of this presentation is to apply the policy goals framework to determine if the Death with Dignity Act is accomplishing its stated goals. Applying a theory of the policy process, the Death with Dignity Act was analyzed using the most recently available data from the Oregon Health Authority. Results showed that since the Death with Dignity Act passed in 1997, 2,518 people have received prescriptions for life-ending medications, and of those, 1657 or 66% have used the medication to end their lives. Based on the data aggregated between 1997 and 2019, the Death with Dignity Act has mostly met its purpose of providing individuals with a terminal illness with the right to die on their own terms and with dignity. However, there are still several issues regarding equity, especially for low-income BIPOC populations. Implications for practice, policy and research are discussed.

Download Full-text

Oregon v. Ashcroft: The Battle over the Soul of Medicine

Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics ◽

10.1017/s0963180103123158 ◽

2003 ◽

Vol 12 (3) ◽

pp. 310-321 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

BEN A. RICH

Keyword(s):

Assisted Suicide ◽

The United States ◽

Physician Assisted Suicide ◽

Death With Dignity ◽

War Of Attrition ◽

Dying Patients ◽

Medical Disputes ◽

Aid In Dying ◽

Death With Dignity Act ◽

Dignity Act

When one considers the protracted and continuing struggle of the citizens of Oregon to include physician-assisted suicide (also known as “physician aid in dying”) among the panoply of measures available to dying patients and the physicians who care for them, the depth and breadth of the issue becomes inescapable. The potential intractability of the dispute is illustrated by the very fact, noted in the preceding parenthetical phrase, that consensus eludes us on even the most basic of semantic points—how we are to most aptly characterize the conduct in question? The case featured in this issue's The Caduceus in Court must be examined as the latest battle in a long war of attrition waged by opponents of physician-assisted suicide against the Oregon Death with Dignity Act (“the Oregon Act”). After briefly reviewing that history, I will then consider the details of Oregon v. Ashcroft and the implications of the litigation not only for the care of dying patients but also for the regulation of medical practice in the United States and, more broadly still, the search for resolution of serious medical disputes in a democratic society.

Download Full-text

The Oregon Death with Dignity Act: The Right to Live or the Right to Die?

Journal of Loss and Trauma ◽

10.1080/15325020802173868 ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 14 (3) ◽

pp. 161-169 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

John S. Westefeld ◽

Alissa Doobay ◽

Jennifer Hill ◽

Clare Humphreys ◽

Riddhi Sandil ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Right To Die ◽

Death With Dignity ◽

Death With Dignity Act ◽

The Right ◽

Dignity Act

Download Full-text

Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis and a “Death With Dignity”

OMEGA - Journal of Death and Dying ◽

10.1177/0030222818788254 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 81 (4) ◽

pp. 567-576

Author(s):

Jennifer A. Andersen

Keyword(s):

Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis ◽

Current Knowledge ◽

Limited Time ◽

Decisional Capacity ◽

Death With Dignity ◽

Time Line ◽

Death With Dignity Act ◽

To Receive ◽

Dignity Act ◽

Lateral Sclerosis

The Oregon “Death With Dignity” Act (DWD Act) allows a terminally ill patient with 6 months to live to ask a physician for medication to end their life. To receive the medication, the DWD Act requires the patient to verbally request the prescription twice 2 weeks apart as well as in writing. Patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis have three main barriers to using DWD: (a) the ability to communicate their informed consent as the disease progresses further, (b) the possibility of dementia which may affect their decisional capacity, and (c) given the nature and speed of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, limited time is available for patients to self-administer the prescription and may rush the time line for the death. This article reviews the current knowledge and addresses the need for adjustments to existing law and recommendations for states considering a DWD law.

Download Full-text