Assisted Suicide - - -A rose by any other name

Recently, the House Judiciary Committee held a public hearing for HB 513 relative to end of life aid in dying for certain persons suffering from a terminal disease. Aid in dying is another name for assisted suicide is another name for death with dignity and so the rhetoric goes.  As I read through the articles and testimony presented . . .  elder abuse, death panels, terminal, self-administered . . . were words with meaning, but do these words have hidden meanings?

Where did this concept of “physician assisted suicide” originate?  Back in 1980 following the publication of “Jean’s Way,” in which Derek Humphry relates his story of helping his “terminally ill” wife kill herself in 1975.  Red flags! Red flags! 

What happened the principles in the Declaration of Independence?  You know where it says “we hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal and endowed by their Creator to certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, . . .”  Suicide was murder albeit self-murder.  People who attempted to kill themselves were considered ill and put under medical care.  And yet, here is a man who admittedly assisted his wife in killing herself.

Was she really given a “terminally ill” prognosis?  Did Mr. Humphry have other reasons to help his wife murder herself?  Did he stand to benefit monetarily upon her passing?  Was he abusing her is some manner?  Isn’t he at minimum an accomplice to murder?

Be that as it may, in 1980, Derek Humphry began selling Americans on the idea that life had no value and that individuals who could be convinced that life was not worth living, should be allowed to terminate their lives with the help of a physician or other person as he founded the Hemlock Society.

Over the years, the names have changed to End of Life Choices, to Caring Friends until today where they are known as Compassion Choices.  I wonder whose “choices” they reference.

Reading about Oregon and Washington, the only two states that currently have “physician assisted suicide” laws, causes one to shake the head.  How is “terminal” defined?   In HB 513 it refers to a prognosis of less than six months until death.  What if the doctor is wrong?  As in the case of Jeanette Hall.  She states:

“I wanted to do our [assisted suicide] law and I wanted my doctor to help me.   Instead, he encouraged me not to give up . . .   I had both chemotherapy and radiation . . .

“It is now nearly 10 years later.  If my doctor had believed in assisted suicide, I would be dead.”

Or what about Barbara Wagner, who was diagnosed with terminal cancer.  Her doctor offered her hope in a new chemotherapy drug, Tarceva.  The Oregon Health Plan denied her request for coverage, but instead offered her comfort care and physician aid in dying, aka assisted suicide.

Barbara told them, “Who do you guys think you are?  You know, to say that you’ll pay for my dying, but you won’t pay to help me possibly live longer.”

According to Dr. William Toffler, a critic of assisted suicide, the state has a financial interest in offering death instead of life.  The Chemotherapy drug such as Tarceva costs $4,000 per month while drugs to administer death cost less than $100.

Maryanne Clayton was diagnosed with Stage IV lung cancer and given two to four months to live.  She was eligible for Washington States “Death with Dignity” law.  However, Maryanne chose to participate in a clinical trial with a new drug called Pemetrexate.  That was four years ago.

Other areas of concern with this bill include the administration.  There is no provision in this bill to allow the patient to opt out or rescind their request for a lethal dose.  Once the medication is prescribe there is no supervision provided or required.  Hence the so called “patient choice” is not really available and can be abused.   Some third party could administer the dosage to the unaware patient or it could be administered through an IV.  In fact, “patient control” is a misnomer.  The claim that they are in control because they are being allowed to “self administer” is mere word play.  “Self administer” is defined as the patient’s act of ingesting the medication. . .

Someone else who places the lethal dose in the patient’s mouth qualifies as “self administration.”   Someone else placing the lethal dose in a feeding tube or IV nutrition bag qualifies as ingesting or absorbing and thus is “self administered.”

Ultimately, a rose by any other name. . . Physician assisted suicide or death with dignity or aid in dying are all other names for legalized murder.

New Hampshire would benefit the most IF the Judiciary committee and the full House of Representatives vote to kill HB 513.

The unborn are not potential persons, but human persons with great potential.

In the coming weeks, you will hear me discuss the topic of the sanctity of life many times.  It is my firm belief that a respect for life is the fundamental principle that is the bedrock of our constitutional republic.

“Respect for life is the belief that human beings have a value that transcends all our human capacity to count or measure, which confers upon them an elevated status that must be honored or revered.” (Gushee)

That is a mouthful, but absolutely critical to understand. Even firm Christians and pro-lifers waver at times to uphold this ethic one hundred percent of the time. To love thy neighbor - this includes “the weak, the enemy, the disabled, the stranger, the unborn, the sinner, the poor, the ex-friend” (Gushee) - is one of the most difficult commandments to keep.

While we must remain cognizant of the entire spectrum of the sanctity of life, let us look at abortion. Since Roe v. Wade, there have been an estimated fifty million aborted children. What is the rational? Simply, the right (convenience) of the woman outweighs the right to life of the unborn child.  This supposition is based on a warped definition of personhood.

From a scientific point of view, there is no doubt life begins at fertilization and ends at natural death. For supporters of abortion, personhood only begins at some defining moment after fertilization. For some, it is when brain waves are first detected at around the forty-day mark. For others, it occurs when the baby gains the ability to feel and sense as a conscious being, which occurs as early as the second week of the second trimester. Some have even taken it to extremes, such as pro-abortion feminist Mary Anne Warren, by defining that moment when life begins as when the child is able to engage in sophisticated communication, has problem solving skills, performs self-motivated activity AND has developed concept of self!

The moment of personhood MUST be established at fertilization.  The unborn are not potential persons, but human persons with great potential. If we deviate from this view, we devalue life and move down that road into that “brave new world” envisioned by Huxley in which future generations become disposable commodities.

According to Republican leaders, it is just fine to endorse a candidate who agrees with the party 80% of the time over a candidate who aligns completely with the principles of the party.  The 20% of the equation that is almost always excluded is LIFE.   No more 80% Republicans!  Just another Republican is not good enough. 

As governor of New Hampshire I will fight to restore a culture of life in this great stat.  I will work with the legislature to reinstate our Parental Notification bill.   I will request my attorney general examine end of life laws and be a voice for personal responsibility and a culture of life.  To become the governor who will work to restore a respect for life, I need your help.  Together we will make a difference.

Works Cited

Gushee, D. P. (n.d.). The Center for Bioethics & Human Dignity. Retrieved July 18, 2010, from http://www.cbhd.org/content/sanctity-life-0

Letter in the Union Leader - Linda Twombly

In the July 14th edition of the Union Leader (page C4) you can find this article by Linda Twombly:


"I met Karen Testerman in February when she spoke at the Nashua Republican City Committee meeting. I was impressed by her manner of speaking. She has a gentle spirit and I wanted to know more about her.   She is credible both morally and on issues facing fiscal responsibility. I know that I can trust her to do what she says she will do. Our Governor has not stayed true to the promises he has made to the people of New Hampshire.

Over the last four years New Hampshire has lost its NH advantage due to the out of control spending in Concord. It concerns me as a grandparent that our grandchildren are already in debt from the excess spending.

It is time for New Hampshire’s voters to step up to the plate and support Karen Testerman for Governor, both by your vote and financially. She is a fiscal Conservative and will bring spending back to a reality. She will also work to bring our state back to the type of state the founding fathers would be proud of."

Thank you Linda for your kind words!

Extreme - Radical

It is a well-known tactic to label those with whom you do not agree.  You hear it attached to the right wing usually accompanied by extreme or radical.

Just what does it mean to be extreme?  According to the dictionary extreme is “furthest from the center or given point.  Let’s look at some results of polls taken here in America.

86% believe in God

78% believe in Jesus Christ

87% believe in voluntary student-led prayer

67% believe define marriage between one man and one woman.

Over half of Americans identify themselves as pro-life.

So Christians who believes in marriage between one man and one woman and respect life are in the center of American opinion.  Who is extreme?

And radical is defined as “advocating thorough or complete political reform.”  What is so radical about supporting marriage as a man and a woman?  Isn't joining together to create the next generation the natural order of the life cycle?  

Freedom to Choose

Choice is the politically correct term that many a campaign has used to promote the cause of women.  That is as long as she chooses the correct act.  It is a woman's right to choose.

However, when she chooses life the hackles stand tall.  What is of interest is that recently Bill Binney, candidate for US Senate from NH, told his audience that he and his wife faced with the decision whether to allow a child to be born with possible birth defects.  But in reality the positive test for the birth defect was wrong, and his child was born normal. 

And in the case of Tim Tebow, Heisman Trophy winner, his mother faced a similar situation.  They were told that her pregnancy could be dangerous.  But the Tebows also chose life.  

Did you ever wonder how many of the 50 plus million babies who were aborted were "falsely diagnosed" with a birth defect and would have been normal at birth?  Have you ever wondered how many women chose to end the life of their child because the pregnancy was potentially "dangerous" to the mother?  Do you ever wonder what America would be like if even half of those 50 million babies were alive today?