So, who is Derek Humphry, and why does it matter that he’s been invited back into the Compassion and Choices fold?

First, who is Derek Humphry?

In addition to attaining fame with the founding of the Hemlock Society and infamy after leaving his first wife when she got diagnosed with cancer, Mr. Humphry is notorious for a lengthy career of uttering discomfiting remarks on the subject of assisted suicide. Humphry’s words and actions have long mortified the image conscious, Madison Avenue prepped, and socially Botoxed suicide advocacy group Compassion & Choices.

Consider, for instance, a selection of a few of the choicer tidbits from his book, Freedom to Die: People, Politics, and the Right to Die Movement. One page 339 of the book, Humphry argues that health care economics, rather than “individual liberties or increased autonomy, will drive assisted suicide to the plateau of medical practice.” That can’t have been popular with the C& C folks, who’ve spent millions and years marketing the far more palatable message that aid in dying/doctor prescribed suicide is all about choice and control.

In the chapter entitled “The Unspoken Argument,” Humphrey spends some time describing the unfortunate overgrowth in seniors (whom he later refers to as “greedy geezers” on p. 347) with chronic diseases , then goes on to say, “even though it is politically incorrect to use economics as an argument in favor of the right to choose the time and manner of one’s death—for the moment at least,” “the pressures of cost containment provide impetus, whether openly acknowledged or not, for the practicalities of an assisted death.” (p. 339)

In other words, it might be politically incorrect to admit out loud, but encouraging grandma—or lots of grandmas—to commit assisted suicide is a good way to cull the population of greedy geezers and save a wad of health care dollars. Lest one think the aforementioned characterization as unduly harsh, a quick read further in the chapter reveals another ‘brutally honest’ quote as Humphry considers assisted suicides : “Is there, in fact, a duty to die–a responsibility within the family unit–that should remain voluntary but expected nevertheless.” (p. 339)

Assisted suicide should be “voluntary but expected?” Sounds more like coercion than either compassion or choice.

Words aren’t all that’s controversial about the Hemlock Society’s loquacious founder. His actions have, at times, been even more edgy. Recently, Derek Humphry was in the news as a promoter of suicide kits from a company now shut down by the FBI. According to an article in Oregon’s Register-Guard newspaper:

“A spotlight was cast on the mail-order suicide kit business after a 29-year-old Eugene man committed suicide in December using a helium hood kit. The Register-Guard traced the $60 kit to [the company, which] has no website and does no advertising; clients find [the] address through the writings of Humphry.” For more information, see Choice is an Illusion

So, why the invite?

At first blush, it seems like Compassion & Choices has more to gain by continuing to maintain an arm’s length distance from Mr Tell-It-Like-It-Is-Humphry than from this well-publicized “Kiss and Make Up” conference invite. After all, animosity has existed for years between the former Hemlock Society and its more recent offspring Compassion & Choices. See a Derek Humphrey’s article “Farewell to Hemlock: Killed by Its Name.” http://www.assistedsuicide.org/farewell-to-hemlock.html where he blames rogue board members, Madison Avenue public relations specialists, and political strategists for the break up and name change.

Might C&C be evidencing a return to its Hemlock roots? Could the group actually be showing its true colors publicly, finally become more honest about the ugly underbelly of the assisted suicide/euthanasia movement’s history and goals? Could it finally be outing and admitting the financially coercive effect of legalizing doctor prescribed suicide in the context of budget cuts and an absence of adequate insurance coverage?

Somehow, that doesn’t quite ring true.

More likely, tired of being tarred as “Compassion & Choices, formerly the Hemlock Society,” and unable to deny the truth of the connections between the two organizations, C &C’s Madison Avenue handlers have advised the group to makeover its controversial history along with its infamous founder. In an odd sort of way, it makes sense. Rather than continuing to take the hit from Humphry’s discomfiting actions and words, why not publicly rehabilitated him, soften his image, and market him alongside unfortunate patients and families as a kind of suicide elder statesman?

There’s an old marketing strategy that involves ‘hanging a hat’ on an organizations negatives, or, in more concrete terms, turning a negative into a positive. This appears to be the case with Compassion & Choices sudden departure from the “hold your nose and hope he goes away” strategy with regard to Derek Humphry. Better, perhaps, to make a sympathetic character out of the chap, apply a little cover-up, and hope the new image turns out better than the old, or at least a bit less wrinkly. Then, immaculately coiffed as usual, the multi-million dollar business of Compassion & Choices can continue apace, marketing assisted suicide to unsuspecting geezers.

Sitting down with, and trying to rationally discuss care and treatment options for a loved one can be tough, even in the best situations, even within the most loving of families. Add all-too-frequent caregiving, financial stress, and the relational conflicts to illness and disability, and, before you know it, a tough situation can accelerate into a full-blown family misunderstanding or worse. Add legalized assisted suicide and the whole situation becomes not only complicated, but potentially lethal.

As the mother of an 11 year old child with disabilities related to a traumatic brain injury, and as the primary caregiver for my parents, who are aging, ill, and requiring increased care, I can attest to the difficulties of both providing care and communicating well. As an RN with a specialty in hospice and palliative home care, I have seen first-hand for over 25 years how a serious illness or disability can impact families, finances, and communications. Having cared for ill and dying loved ones, one of whom even considered assisted suicide because he was worried about being a burden to his family, I am well acquainted with the pressures on both patients and families during difficult times. Still, I was unprepared for the extent to which the advent of legalized doctor prescribed death/assisted suicide/so-called death with dignity in Washington and Oregon has imperiled vulnerable patients and changed the topography of family life and relationships for the worse.

As President of True Compassion Advocates, I receive phone calls from well-intended health care professionals, family members and friends trying to help out someone they know or have met who is in the midst of a tough situation. In the aftermath of assisted suicide’s legalization however, I am astounded how often the discussion centers around ways to actively end the patient’s life, rather than focusing on exploring resources for increased patient comfort and caregiver support.

The tragedy of that change has been illustrated time and time again by phone calls such as the one I received from an EMT who worried that the middle aged man she transported by ambulance to the hospital was feeling pressured into “choosing” doctor prescribed suicide. The man, who was seriously ill and in the middle of a difficult divorce, had limited access to financial assistance or funding for caregiving. He was depressed and distressed, and, seeing no other viable options, thought he would ask for lethal medications and end his life legally under Washington’s so-called Death with Dignity Act. Then there was the mentally disabled woman, with moderate diabetes, whose husband thought she should “choose” assisted suicide, and the man whose girlfriend thought a suicide party would be a good way for him to go, even though he was mentally confused and in need of compassionate care.

Friends and families, it seems, are confused as well, even when well-intended, they seem to not realize the inherently coercive impact of a discussion about assisted suicide on someone in ill-health. The subject of killing oneself is not a neutral discussion on can have about any number of other subjects or concerns one might have during an illness or disability. It is not a coffee table discussion per se, or one which is absent of heavily laden emotional content. Rather, inescapably, a discussion surrounding assisted suicide is a discussion wide-open for misinterpretation and miscommunication. It is also wide-open for an overt or subliminal message of coercion, a message that a person (instead of a situation) is burdensome, that one’s family members and friends would be better off without one, that to spare one’s loved ones, a person should end his or her life via a lethal overdose.

The potentially lethal side-effects of assisted suicide discussions came home to roost in the life of my own family a few years ago, almost cutting short my father in law Jack’s life, almost ending prematurely what was later termed by my mother in law to be “the best time in our 50 years of marriage.”

The trouble started when my father-in-law Jack’s hospice nurse discussed the doctor prescribed death with him in one of her visits: in her opinion, this was just an informal discussion about an issue in the news, a casual statement of her general support for the idea. But to Jack, who was ill, vulnerable, and disabled, it was perceived as a direct suggestion that she thought he should kill himself via assisted suicide. Jack thought the nurse somehow had secret knowledge of the terrible death he would experience and the “fact” that he was a burden to his family and friends. The nurse, like many health care professionals, family, or friends who discuss this issue with vulnerable ill people, was utterly clueless about the devastating emotional and psychological effects on a patient of discussing assisted suicide as “a care option.” She literally had no idea of the havoc or heartache she caused, no concept of the dreadful potential impact of her casual conversation or of the intense “power of suggestion’ she introduced when she brought up the subject of assisted suicide.

Fortunately, the subject did come to light in a tear-filled and heart-rending discussion Jack and I had when his thoughts and fears were finally expressed and addressed openly. Fortunately, I was able to tell Jack of his family’s great love for him, how even though the circumstances of his illness were at times burdensome, he himself was not a burden, but rather a blessing: his care was an honor and a privilege for us; even though we could not make him better, by allowing us to care for him he was giving us a gift for all time, the gift of knowing we did all that we could to love him in action. The misunderstanding having been clarified, Jack chose to focus on living the rest of his life with dignity. He joked, played poker with friends, spent time with his bride of 50 years and his children and grandchildren, and soaked up the sun of an Arizona fall. Jack died several months later, with the sun rising over the top of his beloved Camelback Mountain: he died peacefully, comfortably, and naturally with his wife and family at his side. Those months were precious to him and to we who loved him.

As Jack’s situation shows all too clearly, professional or personal communication has never been perfect, but thankfully, it has rarely been lethal. Legalized assisted suicide has changed all that. Now, a misunderstanding, a misspoken or missing word or a frustration expressed from exhaustion or distress becomes an unwitting tool for a patient or loved one’s premature suicide death. Vulnerable ill persons or those with disabilities often feel afraid and distressed–they worry about being a burden on loved ones or on society. Having even a well-meaning discussion of doctor prescribed suicide inadvertently sends the patient a message that family members do not intend, and would be horrified to know has been sent.

The message, “Yes Mom, we understand why you want to explore death with dignity. We want what you want,” is transformed, in the heart and mind of a vulnerable ill person, to: “Oh, it’s true. I am a burden. I should get out of the way. Doctor prescribed suicide is the answer. I need to spare my family from having to take care of me.”

Instead, the message we intend, the message the vulnerable ill need to hear, the one we want to send, is the following:

“You are not a burden, but a blessing. We love you. We can’t make you better, though we wish we could. By allowing us to care for you, you give us the gift of being able to continue to live out our love for you. To be allowed to walk this part of life’s journey with you is an honor and a privilege. You have cared for us and shown us how to live. There is nothing more important, nothing we’d rather do than to be with you, to care for you. Thank you giving us the gift of being together for whatever time remains.“

This message of love and support, of accompaniment and care, is truly compassionate. As a hospice nurse of 25 years, I have witnessed the extraordinary power of family members and friends caring for one another. I have also seen how loving communication, lived compassion-in-action, and safe and effective care transform individuals and communities, foster hope, and change lives for the better.

All of which makes the tragedy of legalized assisted suicide all the worse…

It wasn’t supposed to be this way. Pundits, newspapers, and suicide proponents assured us Washington’s Death with Dignity Act, (DWDA) like Oregon’s before it, was safe. Only those who wanted to commit doctor prescribed suicide would be affected by the Act, they said. It would be one choice among many, we were told.

For vulnerable Washingtonians, nothing appears to be further from the truth.

With both states implementing draconian budget cuts on health care for the poor and reducing or eliminating “disability lifeline” support, the “choice” of doctor prescribed death appears to have become illusory. In these tough economic times, vulnerable people struggling with aging, illness, and disability are receiving the wrong message—that good care choices are few or nonexistent, but state-sponsored assisted suicide is cheap and readily available.

The consequence? Both Washington and Oregon’s suicide and senior suicide rates have climbed since the legalization of doctor prescribed death; both states have slashed services to persons with disabilities and the elderly; in both states desperate calls to advocacy organizations have increased. (See TCA’s News section for an article detailing Oregon’s budget cuts affecting ombudsmen for people in assisted living.) Health care professionals, including hospice workers, have spoken to us about the recent effects of budget cuts and health care changes on the lives of the terminally ill. Hospitals, we’ve been told, are now “dumping” very ill, even dying patients out into the community, into nursing homes or adult family homes ill-equipped to properly care for them. Patients and families are feeling more overwhelmed than ever, given less support, and less access to the care they need.

Into this context–the context of financial desperation, draconian budget cuts, and overwhelmed caregivers–we in Washington and Oregon have placed legalized assisted suicide. To imagine, as some suicide proponents claim, that authentic “choice” can really occur in such a climate, is to employ the worst sort of magical thinking, the sort that a three year old employs when, in wishing to become invisible, he or she imagines he or she IS invisible. Just because one hopes that Death with Dignity laws will not become the vehicle for abuse from unsavory government bureaucrats, insurance companies, or family members, does not make it so.

One recent call to True Compassion Advocates concerning an elderly woman with a disability, serious illness, and limited life expectancy is a case in point. The woman was paralyzed, being discharged prematurely from the hospital, and couldn’t afford the specialized comfort care she needed. She’d been told by hospital staff that she would need to pay seven or eight hundred dollars a day to be in a facility that could meet her medical needs and assure her pain control and comfort care. According to this unfortunate woman and to a concerned relative, it wasn’t truly her “choice” when she asked for doctor prescribed suicide under Washington’s so-called Death with Dignity Act. She didn’t really want a lethal prescription; rather she desperately wanted to be cared for. She worried her children would be strapped with a big debt, was afraid her children would be angry with her if she racked up a huge bill before she died. One family member said he thought the woman was being “forced” into doctor prescribed suicide “because of the cost of care.”

Being “forced” into considering doctor prescribed suicide doesn’t sound much like choice, not for this unfortunate woman, and not for the many others like her who are invisible to the public eye and to the state’s rudimentary death with dignity statistics, but quite real nonetheless. It certainly doesn’t sound like the sort of aid-in-dying “choice” residents of Washington and Oregon were promised when they voted yes to doctor prescribed death. And yet, Washington and Oregon’s assisted suicide statutes are upheld publicly and being exported to other states as paragons of individual choice, with nary a flaw. The truth appears to be quite a bit more complex: for some people, the “choice” of aid in dying is not a choice at all, but rather a “forced” decision resulting from increasing health care costs, reduced health care coverage, and worries about family finances.

One hopes the residents of Vermont, Montana, and other states considering so-called Death with Dignity laws are listening. Assisted suicide as practiced in Washington and Oregon is far different than it appears. Until or unless these states can assure the safety of their own residents from pressure to commit doctor prescribed suicide, they should defer from even considering such legislation. In tough economic times, with limited state financial resources, it’s far more compassionate to provide care and ensure safety for vulnerable ill, elderly, and disabled persons rather than to provide the means for “forced” decisions to end their lives prematurely.

Even family members and loved ones are unaware of the extent to which such a “choice” can feel compulsory rather than voluntary to a person who is ill. Chillingly, as more and more stories come to light, it’s clear that voters in Washington and Oregon are not getting the choice they were promised when they voted for what they thought was Death with Dignity. Nor are legislators in Vermont, Montana, or elsewhere who are considering legalization fully aware of what is happening “behind the scenes” in Washington and Oregon. Should they know about the deleterious effects of such laws on the ill, elderly, and disabled, they could not, in good conscience, advocate or vote for doctor prescribed death.

A quick summary of those adversely affected by doctor prescribed suicide under Washington and Oregon’s so-called Death with Dignity Acts (DWDA) include:

• A Spokane man whose niece, Katie Densely, in a letter to a Spokane paper, describes his horrifying “execution style” death from assisted suicide under Washington’s DWDA,

• A woman with a cognitive disability and moderate (not terminal) diabetes who told a Seattle area nurse her husband wanted her to stop taking her insulin so she would qualify for the DWDA then “choose” doctor prescribed suicide,

• Several frail, elderly women confided to their Seattle-area pastors they considered assisted suicide because they felt “like a burden” to their adult children who had expressed concern about the costs of Mom’s assisted living facilities and nursing homes “eating into their inheritances”,

• An elderly gentleman whose young wife (and financial heir) hosted a suicide party after encouraging him to die via doctor prescribed suicide, despite the objections of other family members who wanted to care for him,

• An elderly woman in an assisted living facility requested doctor prescribed death because she “couldn’t stand to live in pain any longer.” An investigating nurse discovered the unfortunate woman’s pain had been egregiously mismanaged for years: She only needed basic pain control to have her symptoms relieved–but under Washington’s law, she might have died prematurely of assisted suicide rather than receive the care she needed.

• A concerned nephew worried that his uncle’s untreated depression and lack of adequate care funding led to his request for doctor prescribed suicide,

• A woman with financial assets whose cancer returned decided not to seek any treatment, instead requested doctor prescribed death in order to spare her family financial or emotional “burden” of caring for her. The timing of her request coincides with the federal implementation of the estate tax changing from zero in 2010 to 35% in 2011. One wonders if this was a factor in her “choice.”

• A seriously ill paralyzed woman was discharged prematurely from a Seattle-area hospital. Worried about being a burden to her family and not having financial resources for adequate care, she requested doctor prescribed death via the DWDA.

• Family members, friends, and health care professionals caring for those dying by doctor prescribed suicide have reported experiencing severe emotional trauma and long term complicated grief related to the assisted suicides of patients or loved ones,

• Legal, health care, and hospice professionals have expressed concern that the elder abuse chronicled by the Seattle Times in Washington’s adult family homes may be the tip of the iceberg and vulnerable adults may be pressured into assisted suicide by unscrupulous caregivers, those seeking financial gain, or those seeking to hide abuse.

Note: Each of the above mentioned circumstances has been reported to True Compassion Advocates by concerned family members, friends, and health care professionals.

These are just a few ways in which the so-called Death with Dignity Act has affected Washington and Oregon residents negatively. ( A more detailed description of the most recent of these tragic stories will appear in an upcoming blog.)

Washington and Oregon are experiencing severe budgetary shortages related to the current economic downturn. These two states, like many others, have been making tough budgetary and financial choices, including the slashing of funds supporting the poor, the ill, and those with disabilities. The difference? In Washington and Oregon where doctor prescribed death is legal, such cuts not only harm at risk individuals and populations, but may even incentivize assisted suicide.

Washington’s 2011 budget for instance, radically cuts funding for the state’s Basic Health Plan for the poor and guts necessary funding for the Disability Lifeline. The elderly in both states have been negatively affected by cuts in basic services and housing. Such funding cuts would be ethically problematic anywhere. But in the only two states in the country where doctor prescribed suicide is legal, the ethical problems of slashing care while providing state-sponsored assisted suicide are especially egregious. Some of the patients and families detailed above sought state sponsored suicide because they felt their care options were limited. Add to that their expressed concerns about inadequate health care funding and worries about being a burden to their families, and the ethical problems of such laws increase exponentially.

The best advice we in Washington and Oregon have to offer states such as Vermont or Montana considering assisted suicide legislation comes from words of Barbara Wagner, a poor Oregon resident who was refused chemotherapy by the Oregon State Health Plan and offered the cheaper option of doctor prescribed death instead:

“Don’t go there.”

Don’t enact assisted suicide laws–don’t even consider enacting such laws. Washington and Oregon’s Death with Dignity Acts are unjust and may well be discriminatory. The choice they purport to offer is illusory at best, unintentionally coercive at worst. Instead, legislators should implement safe and effective care for the poor, disabled, elderly, and ill. Heed the advice of Barbara Wagner, who literally died trying to convince Washingtonians not to follow Oregon’s lethal example. (To watch Barbara Wagner, please see TCA’s media section, half way down the page…)

Mr. Alex Schadenberg, of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition, was able to effectively highlight the dangers of lethal laws like Canada’s Bill C-384, which masquerade as choice. Mr. Schadenberg led the Canadian movement to protect elders, people with disabilities, and those with serious illness from the many abuses of assisted suicide and euthanasia.

His statements, which follow, reflect the necessity of helping people live with dignity. We couldn’t agree more. Handing vulnerable ill people a bunch of lethal drugs when they need better care doesn’t strike us as very compassionate, nor does putting elders or people with disabilities at increased risk for abuse.

“Bill C-384, the private members bill that would have legalized euthanasia and assisted suicide in Canada was strongly defeated by a vote of 228 to 59.

We would like to thank every member of parliament who voted against Bill C-384. We would also like to thank all of our supporters who made this victory possible. Months of work have resulted in an incredible victory. But the battle is not over.

We are working to turn the debate on this issue to a debate on how Canadians can live with dignity.

We recognize that many people have raised legitimate concerns.

It is our goal to work with members of parliament and other Canadian leaders to identify ways to:
- improve palliative/hospice care throughout Canada,
- change attitudes and improve services for people with disabilities,
- institute an effective national suicide prevention strategy,
- promote programs that identify and eliminate the scourge of elder abuse.

We must continue to build a nation that upholds the dignity of all its citizens.
We must continue to create a paradigm that protects all Canadians, including its most vulnerable.
We reject the concept that killing can be the answer to problems that are properly solved by a caring society.”

Bravo Canada!  Indeed, killing is not the answer.  A caring society evidences true compassion, rather than false choices.  Canada’s victory shows once again that the choice proffered by proponents is a lie.   The more people find out about assisted suicide, the more they oppose it.

We’ll look forward to more victories like this one elsewhere.

Mr Schadenberg’s contact information is as follows:

Alex Schadenberg
Euthanasia Prevention Coalition
www.euthanasiaprevention.on.ca
euthanasiaprevention@on.aibn.com
1-877-439-3348

I first met Bud and his lovely wife Heidi in Washington State the fall of 2008. I’d come, film crew in tow, to hear first-hand the story of this extraordinary man and his last great adventure, with the thought that perhaps he could be featured in Coalition Against Assisted Suicide ads showcasing his story and perspective.  I left that day, not with a story, but with two new friends. I’d had the fortune to meet a great man and an amazing woman–and to have been witness to a unique partnership of souls.  It was the first of many treasured conversations with Bud and Heidi over the course of the next year and a half, conversations notable for their lively content, abundant good sense, and, happily, unparalleled hilarity. 

But at that first meeting in the fall of 08, the Coalition, along with thousands of volunteers statewide, were in the throes of fighting Washington’s assisted suicide ballot initiative, Initiative 1000. Though outspent almost 5:1 by suicide proponents with 10 years prep time and loads of out of state cash to drop on advertising, the race was still neck in neck, with the polls virtually tied.

Into this fray appeared the extraordinary Dr Mayer, a psychiatrist and former Assistant US Surgeon General under C. Everett Koop. Bud’s perspective—that the assisted suicide initiative’s safeguards were a sham and that aiding and abetting vulnerable ill people in killing themselves was the opposite of good health care–was cogent, logical, and compelling.

Even more compelling was the fact that Dr. Mayer wasn’t only speaking to the issue as a psychiatrist with decades of clinical experience caring for suicidal patients and developing life-saving policies for suicide prevention and treatment. Nor was he speaking solely from the wealth of public policy experience he’d attained in a decorated career in public service, though both of these perspectives were convincing. Instead, Bud Mayer was speaking as a man–a man diagnosed with not just one, but several life-threatening terminal illnesses, a man who’d already lived well past his six month prognosis, to the tune of several extra years.

Over the next months, and even as late as a month ago, Bud waded into the assisted suicide debate courageously, armed with his trademark diplomacy and an inerrant ability to speak to the truth with kindness. He spoke to documentary crews, local and national news outlets, and newspaper reporters. Convincingly, he narrated his own story, replete with examples of the inexact science of predicting a patient’s death in six months or less. Undiagnosed and untreated depression, too, concerned him about the initiative, as did the horror of treating a suicidal person’s cry for help as a request to be killed, along with the inevitability of abuse in such a law, including the risk for non-voluntary deaths and elder abuse to be dressed up as “choice.”

The Coalition Against Assisted Suicide never did show the add footage shot of Bud—suicide proponent’s despicable trashing of Barbara Wagner (a poor woman who was denied chemotherapy by Oregon and offered assisted suicide instead), and the vicious tone of their campaign made Coalition leaders decide not put to Bud’s fragile health at risk in such a volatile public arena. Tragically, voters misinformed about the dangerous nature of legalized assisted suicide and deceived by a host of misleading ads, voted I-1000 into law in November of 2008.  

With the one year anniversary of I-1000’s implementation set for March 5th, we would do well to remember that Bud was right: the choice proffered by Washington State’s Death with Dignity Act is indeed a lie.  His prescient predictions of abuse actually have come to pass–True Compassion Advocates has recieved calls about  seniors feeling pressured to commit assisted suicide and health care providers torn at being involved in medically sanctioned killings.   

The impact of Bud Mayer’s life and legacy cannot be underestimated. Not only did he live an extraordinary life of public and private service, but in their last great adventure together, he and his beloved Heidi faced his illness and infirmity with dignity, grace, and humor. Heidi and Bud welcomed strangers into their home sanctuary with trademark hospitality and demonstrated genuine compassion to those at risk for suicide, assisted suicide, and elder abuse.

Dr. William E. (Bud) Mayer died February 10, 2010 “in the arms of his beloved wife, Heidi, who was his constant, devoted lover and companion for over forty years, and who has created a home and garden that he believed was a foretaste of Heaven itself.”

Rest in peace Bud. You have given us an authentic example of how to live compassionately, to love well, and to serve generously. It is an honor and a privlege to have known you.  Heidi, you have our heartfelt sympathy and consolation. You are in our thoughts and prayers.

Please see Bud Mayer’s obituary for details of his heroic life and service. To see a video of Bud please see the Media Video section of this site: Facing Life Head On.

Several seniors told the pastor of increased pressure from adult children to “stop taking your medications and die” so the children could have access to funds currently being spent on assisted living apartments and nursing homes.  These victims of elder abuse, faced with a barrage of media information about the costs of elder care, pressure from greedy relatives, and a growing internal sense of “being a burden,” actually considered ending their lives.

Such is the ugly unpublished underbelly of the pro-suicide/assisted suicide movement.  Despite glowing descriptions of compassion and control, the template of manipulative coercion and outright elder abuse described by this pastor and others is all too common.

So, what to do?  How can individuals, families, and communities do a better job at decreasing the lethal market for suicide and assisted suicide?  How do we establish safe harbors in medical and senior care?  What positive resources are available to support at risk populations and prevent elder abuse?

True Compassion Advocates has created a wealth of resources and information to prevent these elders and others with chronic illnesses and disabilities from being coerced into considering suicide and assisted suicide.

A summary of current TCA’s endeavors follows:   Contact us for more information about how to make a life-saving difference in your family or community.

Neighbor to Neighbor Outreach

What do family members and friends chronic health condition or illnesses have in common with elderly neighbors or co-workers with disabilities?  The answer?  Both are high risk populations who frequently have inadequate access to supportive resources and may feel they are a burden.  Simple outreach and neighborly concern can go a long way towards decreasing the market for suicide and assisted suicide and improving support for those at risk.  A kind word or action, a check-in visit, phone call, or email can make a world of difference.  Lend a helping hand, make a meal, reach out with concern. See TCA’s excellent resources on caregiver resources, including organizations which can help, serious illness support, aging with courage, and suicide prevention.

Education & Information

Ever wonder how to get the vital information you or someone you know needs with regard to medical decision making?   TCA partners with individuals and communities to bring dynamic, up-to-date educational resources presentations, and workshops. We have a broad array of news articles, informational materials, and brochures available for distribution. Our brochure, The Simple Guide for Medical Care and Decision-Making is an excellent brief overview of health care decisions, including what questions to ask and an overview of pain control, hospice care, and assisted suicide. Please contact us to order brochures or to inquire about the presentations and workshop we present in communities nationwide.

Safe Harbors

Each person, family, and community has the right to recieve health care they can trust with their lives. They have a right to know if their hospital, senior living facility, or health care provider offers excellent care to vulnerable ill people or lethal drug overdoses. Before choosing a provider, call or write and ask if they offer safe harbor from assisted suicide or elder abuse. Writing Letters/ Contacting Health Care Providers

Tell us your stories

Many family members have emailed us or called us to tell us their experiences and challenges with caring for ill loved ones, finding health care providers they can trust with their lives, and episodes of assisted suicide, along with concerns of elder abuse, or suicide promotion. Please feel free to contact us if you’d like to tell us your story or receive information or support. Just knowing you aren’t alone can make a world of difference.

Communities for Compassionate Care(CCC)

TCA works collaboratively with organizations and communities such as the newly forming Communities for Compassionate Care which offers life-affirming health care, pastoral support, and community-based services to increase support during aging, disability, illness, and caregiving.  CCC facilitates compassionate connections between people who need help and life-affirming organizations which can assist them.  More info about this exciting new endeavor will be forthcoming.

Supportive Care Gatherings

Peaceful demonstrations of compassion on behalf of those at risk for suicide, assisted suicide, and elder abuse are held at various community locations, including hospitals and senior living facilities. Please call TCA for further news about how you can, literally, walk your talk, save lives, and promote truly compassionate care.

A few months ago, mired in Seattle traffic, I chanced upon a conversation between a radio host and an elderly woman. Her voice was deep, etched gravelly with the accumulation of wisdom and years. Her accent reminded me of my long-departed grandmothers—Ireland’s lilt softened by decades raising a family in America.

“So many people are unhappy these days—they rush from thing to thing (pronounced lovingly in Irish syntax as ‘ting to ting’), all the while forgetting to be thankful. ‘Tis so sad.”

“I’m 85 years old,” she said. “ Some years ago, I decided t’would be my mission to spread a spirit of thankfulness. Now, when someone at the grocery store or the coffee shop asks me ‘How are you?,’ I simply respond, “I’m grateful.”

The host, stunned, responded, “Wow. That’s an amazing response. Then what happens?

“Well,” she said, “it’s almost always the same: they wonder if I’ve won the lottery or some such thing. They blurt out, “What are you thankful for?” And I tell them, I’m thankful to be alive. I’m grateful for faith, family, and friends. I have so much to be grateful for. We all do.” Tears sprang from my eyes even before Ireland’s finest completed her lesson.

I thought of my own family, my husband and children, who I’m so grateful for, but who receive far less appreciation and thanks than they deserve. I thought of my parents and my mother-in-law, who I love so very much. I consider it an honor and a privilege to be with and to care for them through aging and illness—but do they know that?

I thought of my father-in-law Jack, who I’d nursed the previous year as he lived, then died, of pulmonary disease. I remembered how Jack, despite a tough childhood and difficult upbringing during the depression, had been one of the most thankful people I’d ever known. I reflected how, when he was sick and vulnerable, Jack had considered assisted suicide, worried his care imposed too great a burden on his loved ones. Fortunately, before it was too late, we were able to speak to him of the depth of our love and appreciation, the deep honor and privilege of being able to care for him, and our thankfulness he allowed us accompany him in his final days and months. Finally, I remembered how Jack lived AND died with authentic dignity, naturally and comfortably, his family surrounding him as the morning sun rose above his beloved Camelback Mountain on the first hours of the first day of the New Year.

Weeping quietly, I remembered the wisdom I’ve gleaned from the thousands of courageously living dying people in my 25 years as a hospice nurse—the wisdom to be thankful for each day, the strength to both give and receive love, the appreciation of today and yesterday, and the hope to leave a living legacy of love.

I listened to the final words delivered by the Irish sage, her rough speech alive with the cadence of Irish music.

“And do ye know, I feel quite certain of this as well. On the day that I die, I might be strugglin for breath or hurtin. But when they ask me how I’m doing, I’ll tell them as I always have…I’m grateful. I’m so grateful.”

I am thankful too, for my own family, for all the families and friends who care for ill loved ones , who reach out to strangers in need, and advocate for those who cannot speak for themselves.  I am grateful indeed.

Opponents warned of the dangerous consequences of legalizing lethal drug overdoses for vulnerable ill people.  We also warned that once one class of people has been targeted and made to feel as if they were a burden, another group would follow soon thereafter.  One year later, these warnings have become  an all-too-frightening reality.  Not only are people with life-limiting illnesses in Washington made to feel as if they should ‘put themselves out of our misery’  via assisted suicide, but now it’s open season on the elderly as well.  Phillip Nitschke is coming to town.

Washington State has now become a preferred destination for suicide-promoters and depressed seniors seeking to end their lives.  Phillip Nitschke, the international suicide-promotion pariah, is sponsoring a ‘how to commit suicide’ workshop in Bellingham Washington on November 7th, 2009. His victims?  Not only people with serious illnesses, but also, his ”core audience,” the “well elderly.”

The Australian ‘Dr Death’ has decided to target “the well elderly” with information about how to kill themselves via pills, helium and nitrogen, and other ghoulish forms of suicide, including plastic suicide bags and Mexican animal euthanasia drugs. Having been banned from selling his wares and promoting suicide in Australia and England, he is now turning his lethal gaze towards Washington State, where the recent legalization of assisted suicide gives him all the legal cover he needs to dispense ‘go kill yourself and here’s how’ advice to suicidal seniors and others. Even the public library in Vancouver BC refused to allow him to speak there, fearing that it would be “an indictable offense to counsel or aid or abet any person to commit suicide.”

Nitschke himself makes clear that the reason Washington state is such an ‘attractive’ location for his unsavory suicide-promoting practice, is it’s ‘liberal’ new assisted suicide law.  No doubt he thinks, with good reason, that the glaringly absent safeguards missing from the so-called Death with Dignity Act will protect him (though not his victims)  from prosecution. 

Sadly, unless the state Attorney General’s office or Department of Health do a better job to protect our elders from the abuse of suicide and assisted suicide, the situation does not look good.  Unless a vigorous public and governmental response occurs, Nitschke may well follow through on his plans to set up a permanent ’suicide office’ in Bellingham: that way he can be close to the Canadian border and expand his intended suicidal killing fields there too. 

Fortunately, advocates for truly compassionate care plan to demonstrate their compassion in action by attending a “Protect the Elderly from Suicide/Assisted Suicide Demonstration” on November 7th, from 12 noon to 1:30pm in front of the Sustainable Living Center on 2309 Meridian Street, in Bellingham Washington.  Additionally, many concerned citizens are exhorting the state Department of Health and the Attorney General’s office to do their job and protect seniors and ill people from suicide-promoting exploitation and the thinly veiled elder abuse.  Unless they do, the rot in Pandora’s coffin will continue to spread, victimizing vulnerable people and cheapening life.

Please see the Demonstrate your opposition to assisted suicide section of this web site for further information.