assisted suicide

We Will Not Comply

nancyvalko aging, Alzheimer's, assisted suicide, conscience rights, culture, dementia, disability, education, end-of-life, euthanasia, law, pro-life, suicide, ventilators/life support

In an excellent article in the June 28, 2024 Christian Post Reporter titled “‘Despair over hope’: Pro-life nurses group ‘will not comply’ with Delaware’s assisted suicide bill”,

As reporter Samantha Kamman reported:

“A national coalition of pro-life nurses (NAPN, the National Association of Prolife Nurses) says they “will not comply” with Delaware’s assisted suicide bill that passed in the Senate Tuesday as the state’s lone Catholic diocese is calling on people of faith to urge Democratic Gov. John Carney to veto the legislation. “

Ms Kamman explains that:

“H.B. 140 passed in the Senate with an 11-10 vote and will become law unless Carney vetoes it. Under the proposed law, adult patients who are “terminally ill” or have received the prognosis that they have six months or less to live can request or self-administer drugs to hasten their deaths.

Both the individual’s attending physician or attending advanced practice registered nurse (APRN) and a consulting physician or APRN must agree on the patient’s condition and decision-making capacity. Two waiting periods must pass before the patient can receive the drugs to end their life, and medical professionals who prescribe the medication must provide the patient the opportunity to rescind the request to kill themselves. 

The law would also grant immunity to medical professionals who offer life-ending drugs to patients, so long as they are “acting in good faith and in accordance with generally accepted health-care standards under this Act.” As the bill states, those “acting with negligence, recklessness, or intentional misconduct do not have criminal or civil immunity.” (All emphasis added)

THE RESPONSE

The National Association of Pro-Life Nurses, which has advocated against assisted suicide legislation for over 30 years, condemned the bill, calling it a “moral catastrophe that corrupts the very soul of healthcare.”

Marie Ashby, NAPN’s executive director, argued in a statement to The Christian Post that the bill “preys” on “the desperate and devalues the disadvantaged,” adding that it offers “poison as a perverse form of mercy” to people society deems “inconvenient.”

“Legitimate healthcare heals; it doesn’t kill,” Ashby added. “This law perverts our profession’s sacred duty, turning nurses from guardians of life into agents of death. We will not be silent. We will not comply.”

NAPN President Dorothy Kane contends, “Delaware has chosen death over dignity, despair over hope.” (All emphasis added)

CONCLUSION-two personal stories

My Daughter Marie Killed Herself Using an Assisted Suicide Technique

In 2009, I lost a beautiful, physically well 30-year-old daughter, Marie, to suicide after a 16-year battle with substance abuse and other issues. Her suicide was like an atom bomb dropped on our family, friends and even her therapists.

Despite all of our efforts to save her, my Marie told me that she learned how to kill herself from visiting suicide/assisted suicide websites and reading Derek Humphry’s book Final Exit. The medical examiner called Marie’s suicide technique “textbook final exit” but her death was neither dignified nor peaceful.

Marie was not mere collateral damage in the controversy over physician-assisted suicide. She was a victim of the physician-assisted suicide movement, seduced by the rhetoric of a painless exit from what she believed was a hopeless life of suffering.

Adding to our family’s pain, at least two people close to Marie became suicidal not long after her suicide. Luckily, these two young people received help and were saved, but suicide contagion, better known as “copycat suicide”, is a well-documented phenomenon. Often media coverage or publicity around one death encourages other vulnerable people to commit suicide in the same way.

The Effect on our Healthcare System

Think the assisted suicide won’t affect you or our healthcare system?

Think again.

As I wrote in my 2018 blog “They are Lying to Us“:

“Several years after Oregon’s law was passed, I was threatened with termination from my job as an intensive care unit nurse after I refused to participate in a deliberate overdose of morphine that neither the patient nor his family requested after an older patient experienced a crisis after a routine surgery.

The patient had improved but did not wake up within 24 hours after sedatives used with a ventilator were stopped. It was assumed that severe brain damage had occurred and doctors recommended removing the ventilator and letting the patient die.

However when the ventilator was removed, the patient unexpectedly continued to breathe even without oxygen support. A morphine drip was started and rapidly increased but the patient continued to breathe.

When I refused to participate in this, I found no support in my hospital’s “chain of command” so I basically stopped the morphine drip myself, technically following the order to “titrate morphine for comfort, no limit.”

The patient eventually died (without food or other treatment) after I left but ironically, a later autopsy requested by the family showed no lethal condition or brain injury as suspected.

The physician who authorized the morphine demanded that I be fired.

I was spared because I argued that I followed the order to “titrate morphine for comfort” by stopping the morphine when he was comfortable!

The family never knew the real story.

We need to reject legalized healthcare provider assisted suicide not only for seriously ill, elderly and disabled but also for ourselves, our loved ones and the integrity of our medical system!

FEDERAL FUNDING FOR ASSISTED SUICIDE?

nancyvalko assisted suicide, conscience rights, culture, end-of-life, euthanasia, law, media, medical ethics, pro-life

Many people believe that if something is legalized (like marijuana), it must be ok and if something is federally funded, it must be something GOOD.

In a May 7, 2024, article titled “Democratic Lawmakers Seek To Allow Federal Funding for Assisted Suicide “ in the New York Sun newspaper, Maggie Hroncicht explains the situation and a new petition to oppose this travesty

As she writes:

“For nearly 30 years — since Oregon became the first state to legalize physician-assisted death — Congress has prevented federal funding such as Medicare from being used by patients to pay for the practice. A bill proposed by Democratic lawmakers seeks to change that. 

In 1997, Congress passed the Assisted Suicide Funding Restriction Act, which prohibits using federal funds to provide for any health care services that assisted in someone’s death, including “assisting in the suicide, euthanasia, or mercy killing of any individual.” 

NOW THE PRO-ASSISTED SUICIDE MOVEMENT IS EXPANDING

Right now, pro-assisted suicide proponents have been successful in getting assisted suicide laws passed in 10 states and Washington, D.C and several other states are considering passing assisted suicide this year. This includes my home state of Missouri.

The article notes that:

“Public polling indicates broad support for doctor-assisted suicide, as the Sun has reported, with Gallup inducing that a majority of Americans have “consistently favored” it for nearly three decades.”

The article continues:

““Medical aid-in-dying, an authorized medical practice, is not euthanasia, mercy killing, or assisted suicide,” a draft discussion of the new “Patient Access to End of Life Care Act’’ obtained by the Sun reads.

In states where physician-assisted death is legal, the 1997 restrictions “shall not apply to any information, referrals, guidance, or medical care provided consistent with such programs,” the bill, sponsored by Democratic Representatives Brittany Pettersen and Scott Peters, notes.” (All emphasis added)

CONCLUSION

But now, an online petition started by Alex Schadenburg of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition in Canada has hundreds of signatures is already forming against the proposal, noting that it “would force Americans to pay for assisted suicide (medically approved killing by poison) with their tax dollars.”

“The Canadian group is outspoken in warning America not to follow its path, arguing that legalizing medically assisted death opens a door that can’t be shut. In Canada, as the Sun reported, assisted suicide numbers have been surging, with more than 13,000 patients dying from the procedure in 2022 — representing 4 percent of the country’s total deaths.”

The petition states:

“Dear Representative Jeffries and Representative Scalise,

Thank you in advance for upholding my conscience rights by not approving the use of tax dollars for killing.

I oppose The Patient Access to End-of-Life Care Act (HB 8137) that would force Americans to pay for assisted suicide (medically approved killing by poison) with their tax dollars.

I oppose assisted suicide and I vehemently oppose paying for medically approved killing.”

“Sign and share our petition opposing The Patient Access to End-of-Life Care Act (petition link) 

I have signed and I encourage others to do the same!

Important Position Paper on Criteria for Brain Death and Organ Donation: A Call to Action

nancyvalko assisted suicide, brain death, brain injury, Canada, conscience rights, culture, education, end-of-life, euthanasia, medical ethics, ventilators/life support

I am a signatory on this statement and it deserves to be read and shared. Although the statement touches on Catholic teaching, it is primarily is about science and ethics. Please read the statement and press release.

The statement, “Catholics United on Brain Death and Organ Donation: A Call to Action”, was published on February 27, 2024. It was prepared by Joseph Eble, a physician and President of the Tulsa Guild of the Catholic Medical Association; John Di Camillo, an ethicist of The National Catholic Bioethics Center; and Peter Colosi, a philosophy professor at Salve Regina University.

As a nurse, I have been writing about this topic for years, most recently in my May, 2021 blog “Rethinking Brain Death and Organ Donation” and my experience serving on an ethics committee at a hospital where a patient “failed” one of the hospital’s brain death tests and thus could not have her organs removed.

Although I already knew that the medical criteria used to determine brain death vary — often widely — from one hospital to another, one young doctor checked our area hospitals and came back elated after he found a hospital that did not include the test the elderly woman “failed”. He suggested that our hospital adopt the other hospital’s criteria to allow more organ donations.

When I pointed out that the public could lose trust in the ethics of organ donations if they knew we would change our rules just to get more organ transplants, I was told that I being hard-hearted to people who desperately needed such organs.

I was also alarmed when a 2011 Illinois almost passed a “presumed consent for organ donation” law in 2011 that would allow presumed consent unless a person ” opt(s) of the presumed donation by executing an anatomical gift as otherwise provided in the Act or by filing with the Secretary of State an organ donor opt out document. ” (Emphasis added) Thankfully, it was defeated especially with the help of the disability group Not Dead Yet.

FINDINGS OF THE POSITION PAPER

“At least half of donors declared brain-dead are actually alive when their organs are removed, according to the position paper endorsed by 151 Catholic health care professionals, theologians, philosophers, ethicists, lawyers, apologists, pro-life advocates, and others, including a brain death survivor and a professional organization.” (There is now a webpage of some of the people diagnosed as brain dead who “lived to tell the tale”.)

“Catholic United explains that the criteria for brain death establish only partial loss of brain function. This is now abundantly clear based on scientific studies, a recent effort to lower the legal standard for death, and updated brain death guidelines issued in October 2023.” (All emphasis added)

The statement calls for an effort “to unite against the utilization of the current brain death criteria” because they do not ensure that patients are dead. They recommend concrete action steps to protect vulnerable patients, enable informed decisions, identify better criteria for determining actual death, and protect the conscience rights of healthcare professionals and organizations”.

Also “Catholics United bridges a divide among faithful Catholics about whether the concept of brain death aligns with Church teaching. Some Catholics hold that brain death represents true death when there is complete and irreversible cessation of all brain activity, often called whole brain death. Others hold that brain death does not represent true death. Since the existing criteria establish only partial loss of brain function, all the endorsers—whether they accept or reject whole brain death as true death—agree that “the current brain death criteria in widespread use do not provide moral (prudential) certainty of death.” (Emphasis added)

RECOMMENDATIONS

The statement “calls on health care professionals and institutions to cease organ harvesting that relies on the inadequate criteria, noting that 70% of all donors are declared dead using brain death criteria. “ (Emphasis added)

Given the lack of moral certainty of death whenever the current brain death criteria are used, the statement affirms that “a clear majority of vital organ donors can be presumed alive at the time of organ harvesting.” Since the Catholic Church forbids removing vital organs when this would kill the patient, “it is therefore wrong to remove organs from patients declared dead using these inadequate criteria.”

Catholics United makes a number of other strong recommendations, including:

  • Declining to be an organ donor at the Department of Motor Vehicles.
  • Refusing to be an organ donor after death in advance directives.
  • Improving education on end-of-life care and organ donation at the pastoral level.
  • Identifying criteria that will establish certainty of death.
  • Advocating for conscience protection rights for health care professionals and institutions.

The statement also cites:

“Current president and co-founder of the pro-life advocacy group American Life League, Judie Brown, has decided to update its Loving Will Comfort and Care Directive in accord with the new recommendations. “I think that any organization that has a pro-life document addressing wishes at the end of life needs to be updated in view of this article,” said Ms. Brown.”

CONCLUSION

Unfortunately, now some countries’ healthcare ethics have even degenerated to the point where eight countries including Canada, the Netherlands, Spain, and Belgium allow organ donation after euthanasia by “combining medical assistance in dying (MAiD) with donations after circulatory determination of death (DCDD) is known as organ donation after euthanasia (ODE)”. (Emphasis added)

Personally, I am all for the ethical donation of tissues like bone, skin, corneas, etc. after natural death. And I am also a strong supporter of living donation. For example, I volunteered to donate one of my kidneys to a friend years ago and one of our grandsons was saved in 2013 by an adult stem cell transplant donated by a living person.

Hopefully, this statement can help all of us to better protect ourselves and vulnerable patients at the end of life- especially when it comes to organ donation-as well as promoting a dignified, humane and peaceful end of life.

Victory: “After Initial Hope, Medically Assisted Suicide Bill Won’t Move Forward in Maryland”

nancyvalko ANA, assisted suicide, conscience rights, culture, education, end-of-life, euthanasia, food and water, law, medical ethics, nursing, VSED

In 2019, I testified in Maryland against another “medically assisted suicide” bill that was expected to pass and wrote a blog about it titled “Lessons from the Victory against Assisted Suicide in Maryland”. It failed to pass by one vote.

Now, yet another attempt to pass an assisted suicide bill in Maryland failed by “one or two votes”, according to a Baltimore Sun article titled “After initial hope, medically assisted suicide bill won’t move forward in Maryland”, thanks to efforts like that of Mary Bogdan BSN, MA-C, DNP-S, ALNC who wrote an excellent expert witness testimony stating in part:

“The physician assisted suicide bill has been called many things: medical aid in dying, euthanasia, withholding of food and water, etc., etc., etc. The bottom line is this: I did not become a nurse to kill people. The American Nurses Association (ANA) says that nurses should support patient autonomy, the desire to have control over one’s life. I submit this; if we allow patients to end their lives as desired by them, we subject ourselves to unfathomable consequences.” (Emphasis added)

Note this sentence from the article in the Baltimore Sun “I think that as we slowly got closer to the vote and had more in depth discussions with their constituents, folks just expressed unreadiness to move on it at this time,” Smith said. “I’m obviously very disappointed, but you have to respect the decisions of the individual senators who were listening to their constituents and listening to their conscience.” (Sen. Will Smith is chair of the Judicial Proceedings Committee and a previous sponsor of the bill)

CONCLUSION

Nurse Bogdan’s testimony ends with a powerful quote from Dr.  Harvey Max Chochinov, MD, PhD in his December 2023 recent Medpage article ” Intensive Caring: Reminding Patients They Matter— How to care for those who no longer care about themselves”:

“There is abundant evidence that patients approaching death are susceptible to feeling that they no longer matter. When patients feel life is no longer worth living, healthcare professionals must affirm their intrinsic worth to patients for all that they are, all that they were, and all that they will become in the collective memories of those they will eventually leave behind.” (Emphasis added)

Virginia is now facing SB 280, an assisted suicide bill.

Unfortunately, the assisted suicide proponents never seem to give up and we must continue to be vigilant in every state and continue to educate legislators, healthcare providers, and the general population about these dangerous assisted suicide laws.

Victory on Assisted Suicide, Conscience Rights and AMA Proposed Resolutions

nancyvalko AMA, ANA, assisted suicide, conscience rights, culture, euthanasia, law, medical ethics, nursing

“First Do No Harm-Hippocrates”

Last November, I wrote my blog “NAPN Position Paper on AMA Considering New Resolutions on Assisted Suicide”.

Now, the Life Legal Defense Foundation has announced a great victory on this as well as conscience rights.

I have personally worked with The Life Legal Defense Foundation for years and they are awesome!

Here is their statement:

VICTORY over DEATH PEDDLERS in the American Medical Association…! – LIFE LEGAL DEFENSE FOUNDATION

/ Active Euthanasia / By Life Legal / January 9, 2024:

“In 2022, Life Legal sued California Attorney General Rob Bonta to stop enforcement of SB 380, which would have prohibited physicians from opting out of the state’s assisted suicide scheme. SB 380 required doctors to provide most of the documentation needed for their patients to receive so-called “aid-in-dying” drugs – even if doctors were morally opposed to participating in assisted suicide. The law imposed draconian punishments on physicians who refused to comply, including civil and criminal penalties and professional discipline.

Life Legal, along with Alliance Defending Freedom, represented the Christian Medical and Dental Association (CMDA) in the lawsuit – and we won! After a hard fight, we were able to get the law enjoined (blocked). Life Legal, Alliance Defending Freedom, and the CMDA were victorious in protecting physicians’ rights of conscience – but the wins did not stop there.

Recently, the CMDA joined with members from the Catholic Medical Association (CMA) to oppose two American Medical Association resolutions supporting physician-assisted suicide. As a result of the pro-life stance taken by the CMDA and the CMA, the American Medical Association declined both resolutions. This means the AMA officially remains in opposition to assisted suicide, holding that “permitting physicians to engage in assisted suicide would ultimately cause more harm than good. Physician-assisted suicide is fundamentally incompatible with the physician’s role as healer, would be difficult or impossible to control, and would pose serious societal risks.”

We are honored to represent pro-life physicians and we are grateful for their powerful witness in opposition to assisted suicide.” (Emphasis in original)

CONCLUSION

We nurses are also grateful for this victory and so should everyone who cares about healthcare ethics!

INSPIRATIONAL GERONTOLOGIST TRANSFORMED DEMENTIA CARE

nancyvalko Alzheimer's, assisted suicide, Compassion & Choices, dementia, end-of-life, family, food and water, inspiration, medical, medical ethics, mental health, nursing, palliative care, VSED

I don’t normally read obituaries but this obituary I recently read in the January 11, 2024 Wall Street Journal titled “Naomi Feil, Who Transformed Dementia Care, Dies at 91” was inspiring and, most of all, educational!

MY STORY

When I was 13, I became a volunteer in our local nursing home to help feed the elderly patients, some of whom had dementia. I loved it but was told I should be feeding the patients faster instead of listening to their stories.

When I said that these stories were great and really enjoyed by all the patients at the table, the nurses told me that most of the stories were probably not true anyway!

When I began my nursing career in 1969, patients with dementia were often considered just “difficult” or even “crazy”. Some were put in restraints for safety but that just seemed to agitate them more. I found that sitting and listening to them helped a lot.

So I have long had an interest in people with dementia-most often Alzheimer’s disease, not only because of the patients I cared for as a nurse, but also because of my late mother and brother who also have had the condition.

That’s why I have written blogs about the condition such as ““Repairing Our View of Dementia” and “Five Things my Mother (and Daughter) Taught Me about Caring for People with Dementia”, hoping these blogs would help other caregivers, patients and their families.

NAOMI FEIL’S STORY

Naomi’s obituary is subtitled “Instead of forcing people to remember facts, she helped them express their anger and sorrow. She found it made all the difference.”

Here are some excerpts from the obituary:

“Caregivers, struggling to help people with dementia, often see their role as offering scraps of reality—reminding them what year it is, for instance, or who is in the White House.

Naomi Feil had a different strategy. As a social worker in nursing homes, she resisted the impulse to yank disoriented people back to her reality. Instead, she sought to enter their realities and affirm their emotions. Rather than offering a cup of tea or chirping that everything would be fine, she helped her charges express their anger and sorrow—and found they often were more at ease afterward.”

In the 1960s and 1970s, Feil devised what she called the validation method for dementia care. She wrote books, led workshops and established 24 validation-training centers in 14 countries.

Feil’s ideas have become fundamental to what is now called person-centered dementia care, which focuses on discovering individual needs and preserving dignity rather than following standard routines, said Sam Fazio, a senior director of the Alzheimer’s Association. In such care, he said, “You’re meeting them in their reality versus expecting them to meet us in our reality when they are no longer able to do that.” (Emphasis added)

NAOMI’S HISTORY

“When she was 4 years old, her Jewish family fled Nazi Germany. They eventually settled in Cleveland, where her father was the administrator of a nursing home, which doubled as living quarters for her family. Some of her earliest friends were very old people.”

“Her work was with the troublemakers other staff members avoided. These were the blamers, the martyrs, the moaners, the wanderers, the yellers, the pacers, the pounders whom nobody wanted,” she wrote in one of her books, “The Validation Breakthrough.”

“Sometimes nursing assistants tied people to their chairs so they wouldn’t wander off and make trouble. When she tried to engage with these misfits, a nursing assistant scolded her: “You’re getting them all worked up…. You can’t help them. I’ve been working here for five years, and I ought to know.” 

“Feil persisted and gradually learned from her encounters. ‘I learned not to contradict, patronize, argue, or try to use logic or give insight,” she wrote. Instead, she made clear she was listening. If an old person imagined the nurses were stealing her jewelry, Feil might say, ‘You loved that necklace, didn’t you. Who gave it to you?’ She could share the emotion and then explore deeper.” (Emphasis added)”

As a social worker in the 1960s and 1970s, she developed her methods through trial and error. “

“No lies

“She opposed the idea of telling comforting lies. Lies could be detected, even by those who seemed most deluded, and that would destroy trust. When an old woman said she needed to see her mother right away, Feil wouldn’t point out that her mother was dead. Nor would she promise that the mother would visit soon. Instead, she would make it a conversation: ‘You really need to see your mother! What would you like to tell her?’”

“You don’t argue, you don’t lie,” she said in a TEDx talk. “You listen with empathy and you rephrase.”

When old people were weepy, it was a bad idea to tell them things weren’t so bad, she found. It was better to let the tears flow and talk about what made them sad.”

CONCLUSION

While so much more is known now about dementia and developing treatments, many people still consider it a fate worse than death and a burden on their family. Some have even chosen assisted suicide or voluntary stopping or eating and drinking (called VSED) through “right to die” organizations such as Compassion and Choices.

But, as I wrote last February in my blog “Alzheimer’s Association Ends Agreement with Compassion and Choices”, the Alzheimer’s Association has now ended it’s agreement with Compassion and Choices (the pro-assisted suicide organization) stating:

“In an effort to provide information and resources about Alzheimer’s disease, the Alzheimer’s Association entered into an agreement to provide education and awareness information to Compassion & Choices, but failed to do appropriate due diligence. Their values are inconsistent with those of the Association.

We deeply regret our mistake, have begun the termination of the relationship, and apologize to all of the families we support who were hurt or disappointed. Additionally, we are reviewing our process for all agreements including those that are focused on the sharing of educational information.

As a patient advocacy group and evidence-based organization, the Alzheimer’s Association stands behind people living with Alzheimer’s, their care partners and their health care providers as they navigate treatment and care choices throughout the continuum of the disease. Research supports a palliative care approach as the highest quality of end-of-life care for individuals with advanced dementia.” (All emphasis added)

Good for the Alzheimer’s Association and as I can personally and professionally attest, caring for people with dementia can be a wonderful- if sometimes challenging- experience, for healthcare providers and especially the person with dementia and their families!

Are “Anti-abortion activists” Really Looking “To Rebrand Themselves As Not Religious”?

nancyvalko abortion, assisted suicide, conscience rights, culture, euthanasia, law, medical ethics, nursing, pro-life

Last May, I was interviewed by Dr. Anne Whitesell, an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Miami University “as part of a research project to understand the work of pro-life organizations post-Dobbs and common misconceptions about the movement.”

Dr. Whitesell was very gracious during the interview, and we had a long conversation about what motivates pro-life people-and especially nurses.

I told her about our National Association of Pro-life Nurses and the why and how we do what we do because we call about all lives.

I also told her that the National Association of Pro-life Nurses was not a religious organization but rather open to nurses of any religion or none.

I explained how the National Association of Pro-life Nurses is a “registered non-profit organization that brings nurses together who look for excellence in advancing ethics in nursing practice “and “seeks to establish and protect ethical values of the nursing profession. The organization educates its members on a wide range of bioethical issues” from conception to natural death”.

I also told Professor Whitesell that we are not about being judgmental but rather about truly caring and offering help to desperate people in crisis situations and the people around them before-or even after- a person has chosen abortion or is considering medically assisted suicide. (see “Pro-Life and Other Resources for Help and Information to Protect Human Life”)

Our motto is “I Care” and we even have developed a button with that simple message for our nurses to wear.

PROFESSOR WHITESELL’S NOVEMBER 6, 2023 ARTICLE

Professor Whitesell said she would send me a copy of her eventual article but instead I discovered her November 6, 2023 article titled “As Ohio and other states decide on abortion, anti-abortion activists look to rebrand themselves as not religious.”

Here are some excerpts:

“My research shows that anti-abortion organizations in the U.S. fall into one of three camps. Some are openly religious. Others may have religious staff, but refrain from using religion in their advocacy. A small proportion outright reject the use of religion.

“In my interviews, anti-abortion rights activists said they understood that the public views their movement as anti-woman and driven by conservative Christians. More recently, the movement has adopted pro-woman messaging to counter the perception that they do not support women.

These organizations are increasingly choosing to speak less about religion and more about human rights and science to combat the narrative that the anti-abortion movement is solely a Christian movement.”

and

“Most of the activists I interviewed said their organization does not have a formal stance on religion. Approximately one-quarter of the 45 activists I interviewed, however, said their organizations are explicitly Christian. (Emphasis added)

Professor Whitesell concludes that:

“Instead of using religion to bolster their arguments against abortion, these activists frame abortion as a human rights issue. For them, any loss of human life is tragic, whether it is from abortion, war or the death penalty.

This kind of framing could help the anti-abortion movement shift conversations about abortion away from religious beliefs.” (All emphasis added)

CONCLUSION

Unfortunately, the abortion rights movement’s animus against using religious beliefs in discussions about abortion has real world consequences.

For example, a January 16, 2024, CNA article titled “Religious Americans’ lives possibly at risk in 2024, new report by U.S. bishops says” states:

“Since the overturn of Roe v. Wade in the June 2022 Supreme Court Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision, attacks against the Catholic Church as well as pro-life organizations have risen considerably. The bishops said that annual hate crime statistics gathered by the FBI in 2022 reported anti-Catholic crimes as nearly 75% higher than for any other bias.“

All this is compounded with, the bishops said, a “general failure” on the part of the “federal government to apprehend and prosecute the perpetrators of such attacks.” (All emphasis added)

It is disheartening that articles like Professor Whitesell’s and most mainstream news reporting about abortion and the pro-life movement continue to misrepresent the “anti-abortion movement” as primarily religious rather than a movement based on science, human rights and, above all, helping those involved in crisis situations.

Intensive Caring: Reminding Patients They Matter

nancyvalko assisted suicide, Cancer, culture, dementia, disability, end-of-life, medical ethics, nursing

Last month, there was a beautiful article on Medpage titled “Intensive Caring: Reminding Patients They Matter-How to care for those who no longer care about themselves” by Harvey Max Chochinov, MD, PhD.

Dr. Chochinov quotes Dame Cicely Saunders, the founder of the modern hospice movement, for her famous statement “”You matter because you are you, and you matter to the last moment of your life”.

That statement became an integral part of medical and nursing education in the past and a powerful argument against the current push for legalizing medically assisted suicide.

As Dr. Cochinov states in his article;

“There is abundant evidence that patients approaching death are susceptible to feeling that they no longer matter. When patients feel life is no longer worth living, healthcare professionals must affirm their intrinsic worth to patients for all that they are, all that they were, and all that they will become in the collective memories of those they will eventually leave behind.” (Emphasis added)

and

” A foundational element of this approach is nonabandonment, which demands committed, ongoing care and caring, even when patients no longer care about themselves. Absent someone who cares, suffering, like cancer, can grow, spread, and even kill.” (Emphasis added)

and in contrast:

“Intensive caring sees healthcare professionals hold or contain hope when patients can no longer do so themselves. This means expanding one’s therapeutic imagination to include the possibility that patients may find psychological, spiritual, and physical comfort, tolerable suffering, and for those near the end, a peaceful death. Toward the end of life, hope tends to conflate with meaning and purpose and may be nurtured through connections to those who, or things that, matter.” (Emphasis added)

MY EXPERIENCE

As a new nurse, I was nervous when I was assigned to terminally ill patients.I asked the senior nurses how to approach these patients and if I should be solemn or cheerful. The senior nurses said they didn’t know.

So I came up with a plan. After I clocked out after my shift, I started just visiting with them and listening to whatever they had to say.

I found that there were two basic questions that needed to be answered: “What do you want?” and “What are you afraid of?”

These patients opened up about wanting to die at home without burdening their families and not being in terrible pain at the end. I was able to tell them about good home healthcare options, pain management and being open with their doctors and families. This opened the door to great conversations and often even a lot of laughter!

(I was later chastised by some nurses who criticized the laughter coming from these rooms. I responded by asking them who needed to laugh more than patients in these situations?)

I also started spending time with the relatives who had questions of their own. They were relieved to talk about their fears and sadness and wanted to know how to help their loved ones.

Once, on an on an oncology (cancer) floor, an elderly woman with terminal cancer told me that she wished she could have just one more overnight sleepover with her granddaughter before she died. I told the other nurses and they all enthusiastically joined in with snacks and sodas to make it happen during one night shift, remembering their own special times with their grandmothers.

It was a great success, even though I was caught by an administrator who said I should not make this a habit.

In another case, an elderly woman with advanced cancer was considering another chemo treat but confided that she feared becoming more of a “burden” on her daughter’s family with whom she lived.

I told her that I had just spoken to her daughter the day before and the daughter told me how grateful she was for her mother’s presence and help. For example, the daughter said that since she and her husband both worked, they were relieved to have the mother there for their school-age children when classes ended. The daughter told me how the children loved climbing into bed with grandma and telling her about their day.

My elderly patient was almost reduced to tears by this revelation but then she laughed and admitted that sometimes she fell asleep when the children were talking to her.

I told my patient that whatever else she needed to consider before agreeing to the chemo, fear about being a “burden” should be eliminated.

CONCLUSION

Sadly, Dr. Chochinov cites studies that have shown when patients feel abandoned and bereft of care, they are more likely to contemplate or die by suicide. In addition, he cites studies on the desire for death in the terminally ill “report lower family support relative to those who don’t.”

According to an October 4, 2023 Medical Net news article “Review of Oregon’s assisted dying law finds significant data gaps”:

“Since 2017, fear of being a burden has been cited by around half of those opting for assisted death“. (Emphasis added)

It’s important to remember that no one has to be a medical professional to ask a friend, neighbor, church member, etc. in difficult circumstances to ask “What can I do to help?”.

Just visiting with the person, watching tv with them or bringing a favorite food can be a real day brightener and give family members a much needed boost.

Personally, I know how lonely it can be taking care of a loved one with a terminal illness or a disabling condition without the support of friends or family. Family caregivers also need support and encouragement.

But I also know the wonderful benefits of helping others, both personally and professionally, even just by being there.

NAPN Position Paper on AMA Considering New Resolutions on Assisted Suicide

nancyvalko AMA, assisted suicide, Compassion & Choices, law, medical ethics, nursing, suicide, VSED

A May 1, 2023, article by Dallas R. Lawry, DNP, FNP-C, AOCNP® from the University of California, San Diego in the Journal of the Advanced Practitioner in Oncology titled “Rethinking Medical Aid in Dying: What Does It Mean to ‘Do No Harm?’” at Rethinking Medical Aid in Dying: What Does It Mean to ‘Do No Harm?’ – PMC (nih.gov) reveals that:

“Until 2019, the American Medical Association (AMA) maintained that MAID (medical aid in dying aka assisted suicide) was incompatible with their code of ethics and a physician’s responsibility to heal (AMA, 2022)“.

 But now, the AMA Medical Code of Ethics is considering two provisions that support both positions on MAID, including: “Physicians who participate in MAID are adhering to their professional, ethical obligations as are physicians who decline to participate” (AMA, 2019, 2022; Compassion & Choices, 2022) (Emphasis added)

Now, such ethical dissonance has now led the AMA to considering two new resolutions  at the Interim meeting of the AMA House of Delegates on November 10-14, 2023:

“Resolution 4 is to change the position of the AMA on Medical Aid in Dying (Resolution Link).

Resolution 5 is for the AMA to adopt a neutral stance on Medical Aid in Dying (Resolution Link).”

and, as Alex Schadenberg writes:

“It is important to note that Resolution 4 would remove the AMA statement on not performing euthanasia or participating in assisted suicide:

Physicians must not perform euthanasia or participate in assisted suicide. A more careful examination of the issue is necessary. Support, comfort, respect for patient autonomy, good communication, and adequate pain control may decrease dramatically the public demand for euthanasia and assisted suicide. In certain carefully defined circumstances, it would be humane to recognize that death is certain and suffering is great. However, the societal risks of involving physicians in medical interventions to cause patients’ deaths is too great in this culture to condone euthanasia or physician- assisted suicide at this time.

Both resolutions use the term Medical Aid in Dying (MAiD) rather than Physician Assisted Suicide. The term Medical Aid in Dying is not limited to assisted suicide, it also includes euthanasia. The assisted suicide lobby wants to legalize euthanasia (medical homicide) in America.”

NURSES AND ASSISTED SUICIDE

In 1995, the American Nurses Association stated:

“The American Nurses Association (ANA) believes that the nurse should not participate in assisted suicide. Such an act is in violation of the Code for Nurses with Interpretive Statements (Code for Nurses) and the ethical traditions of the profession. “ (Emphasis added)

But in 2017, the ANA revised its’ position on VSED (voluntary stopping of eating and drinking) “with the intention of hastening death” to “People with decision-making capacity have the right to stop eating and drinking as a means of
hastening death.” (Emphasis added)

In 2019, the American Nurses Association revised their position on assisted suicide titled “The Nurse’s Role When a Patient Requests Medical Aid in Dying”, stating that nurses:

“• Remain objective when discussing end-of-life options with patients who are exploring medical aid in dying.

• Have an ethical duty to be knowledgeable about this evolving issue.

• Be aware of their personal values regarding medical aid in dying and how these values might affect the patient-nurse relationship.

• Have the right to conscientiously object to being involved in the aid in dying process. (But “Conscience-based refusals to participate exclude personal preference, prejudice, bias, convenience, or arbitrariness”)

• Never “abandon or refuse to provide comfort and safety measures to the patient” who has chosen medical aid in dying (Ersek, 2004, p. 55). Nurses who work in jurisdictions where medical aid in dying is legal have an obligation to inform their employers that they would predictively exercise a conscience-based objection so that appropriate assignments could be made” (All emphasis added)

But while the ANA is states that “It is a strict legal and ethical prohibition that a nurse may not administer the medication that causes the patient’s death“, it is silent when some states with assisted suicide laws like Washington state’s where Governor Jay Inslee signed a new expansion to the law in April 2023 to “allow physician assistants and advanced nurse practitioners to be one of the medical providers who sign off on the procedure”, “eliminates a two-day waiting period for prescribing the drugs” and “allow the necessary drugs to be mailed to patients instead of picked up in person”. (Emphasis added) https://www.axios.com/2023/04/24/washington-death-with-dignity-law

CONCLUSION

NAPN opposes both AMA resolutions and the ANA policy on assisted suicide, not only for the safety and welfare of our most vulnerable people but also because there are now many state and national medical professional organizations that support assisted suicide, and other problematic ethical issues and this will have a discouraging effect on idealistic, ethical people considering or remaining in health care which would be devastating to our trust in the healthcare system itself.

Catholic Hospital in Canada Under Fire for Naming Euthanasia Provider as Palliative Care Director-Why Should We Care?

nancyvalko AMA, assisted suicide, Compassion & Choices, conscience rights, dementia, disability, economics, education, end-of-life, euthanasia, food and water, futility, hospice, law, media, medical ethics, mental health, nursing, palliative care, terminal/palliative sedation, ventilators/life support, VSED

In a shocking Sep 16, 2023 article from the Catholic News Agency titled Catholic hospital under fire for naming euthanasia provider as palliative care director | Catholic News Agency, Dr. Danielle Kain, a palliative care specialist who is associate professor and division co-chair of palliative medicine at Queen’s University, was appointed to the directorship of palliative care at Providence Hospital in Kingston, Ontario in Canada despite being “is both a staunch proponent and practitioner of euthanasia.”

Providence Hospital is one of 22 health care institutions in Ontario under the sponsorship of Catholic Health Sponsors of Ontario (CHSO). Canada has one of the most expansive assisted suicide laws in the world and is now considering adding people whose sole medical condition is mental illness. (Emphasis added)

The article also states that “Kain has argued that all publicly funded institutions, including Catholic hospitals, should be compelled to offer MAiD (Medical Aid in Dying) She has also expressed support for the Effective Referral Policy: doctors who have conscientious objections to euthanasia must refer patients to MAiD-offering doctors. In a 2016 Twitter post, Kain wrote: “Making an effective referral is not an infringement of rights.” (All emphasis added)

And

“A variety of professional associations of Canadian Catholic health care providers, including the Canadian Federation of Catholic Physicians, have made appeals to both the CHSO and the local ordinary, Archbishop Michael Mulhall, to intervene….but “The archbishop’s office did not respond before publication to a request for comment.” (Emphasis added)

RECENT HISTORY

In 2019, The National Association of Pro-life Nurses joined the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition USA and other organizations in opposing the  Palliative Care and Hospice Education and Training Act (2019) H.R. 647, S.2080 (known as PCHETA) introduced in the US Congress.

We stated that:

“As nurses, we strive to care for our seriously ill, disabled and terminally ill patients with compassion and the highest ethical standards. We applaud the medical innovations and supportive care options that can help our patients attain the highest quality of life possible.

However now many of us nurses are now seeing unethical practices such as assisted suicide, terminal sedation (with withdrawal/withholding of food, water and critical medicines), voluntary stopping of eating, drinking and even spoon feeding, etc. used to cause or hasten death but often called palliative, “comfort” or routine hospice care for such patients.

Such practices are already  considered acceptable by many influential hospice and palliative care doctors like Dr. Timothy Quill, a board-certified palliative care physician, 2012 president of the American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine and promoter of legalizing physician-assisted suicide and terminal sedation.

It is also disturbing the Compassion and Choice, the largest and best funded organization promoting assisted suicide and other death decisions,  has a mission statement stating:

“We employ educational training programs, media outreach and online and print publications to change healthcare practice, inform policy-makers, influence public opinion and empower individuals.”

and a “Federal Policy Agenda / 2016 & Beyond”  goal to:

“Establish federal payment for palliative care consultations provided by trained palliative care professionals who will advocate for and support the values and choices of the patient….” (All emphasis added)

We believe that the Palliative Care and Hospice Education and Training Act (2019) will allow federal funding to teach and institutionalize such unethical practices without sufficient oversight, safeguards or penalties.”

NOW A NEW PCHETA BILL HAS NOW BEEN PROPOSED

The 2019 PCHETA did not pass in Congress but now a new and almost identical version US SB2243 has just been has been introduced into the US Senate.

A new addition is included to “develop and implement a strategy to be applied across the institutes and centers of the National Institutes of Health to expand and intensify national research programs in palliative care in order to address the quality of care and quality of life for the rapidly growing population of patients in the United States with serious or life-threatening illnesses.”(Emphasis added)

A letter of support for the new 2023 PCHETA bill was signed by a multitude of groups including the Alzheimer’s Association, American College of Surgeons, American Academy of Pediatrics, American Geriatrics Society, the American Heart Association, American Psychological Association, Association of Pediatric Hematology/Oncology Nurses, American Academy of Association of Professional Chaplains, Hospice Action Network Hospice and Palliative Nurses Association, Leukemia & Lymphoma Society Motion Picture & Television Fund, etc.

Even the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) and the Catholic Health Association of the United States have also sent a letter of support for the 2023 PCHETA, citing that it “includes crucial clarifications which ensure that the palliative and hospice care training programs abide by the provisions found in the Assisted Suicide Funding Restriction Act of 1997 (P.L. 105-12) and are not furnished for the purpose of causing or assisting in causing a patient’s death for any reason.” Unfortunately, as we have long observed, practices such as terminal sedation, withdrawal of food and water, etc. are routinely called just “patient choice” or routine comfort care-even in Catholic institutions.

And, as lawyer Sara Buscher of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition USA writes, the 2023 HHS Office of Inspector General’s report cites problems with hospice and she says that the PCHETA’s “safeguards are illusions”, “unenforceable and pretty much meaningless.”

CONCLUSION

In September 3, 2023 article titled ” by Jonathan Turley, a 19 year-old woman with is critically ill with a rare genetic mitochondrial disease that is progressively degenerative but conscious and communicative and on a ventilator, feeding tube and dialysis wanted to be allowed to travel to Canada for an experimental treatment but doctors opposed her plan saying that “she is not accepting the realities of her terminal illness.” She and her family appealed to a court but “Nevertheless, the judge found that she is mentally incapable of making decisions for herself because “she does not believe the information she has been given by her doctors”  and “Accordingly, the court ruled that decisions about ST’s further care should be determined by the Court of Protection based on an assessment of her best interests. Her “best interest,” according to the doctors, is to die.” (all emphasis added)

As lawyer Turley writes: “Thus, the courts have declared that ST cannot choose to continue life-extending treatment and can be forced into palliative care against her will.”

Thus the “choice” of a “right to die” can trump the choice of a right to live and even become a “duty to die”.

We need to be able to trust out healthcare system to provide ethical, life-affirming and compassionate care when we need it most.

A good first step would be to make sure the 2023 PCHETA does not become law.