Sen. Albert: Opposing proposed assisted suicide in Michigan

We received the following guest column from State Senator Thomas Albert.

Michigan once again may become the center of debate about assisted suicide.

In the 1990s, Dr. Jack Kevorkian made national headlines by enabling his “patients” to commit suicide by lethal injection. It sparked a 1998 statewide ballot proposal to legalize assisted suicide, which was rejected by 71% of Michigan voters.

Now, a new proposal introduced by Michigan Democrats is pending in the Legislature, again raising practical questions about how it would be implemented — along with ethical and moral concerns.

Assisted suicide advocates want to repeal Michigan’s current law prohibiting the practice. They would replace it with what they call the “Death with Dignity Act.” This title is misleading and hypocritical, as the dignity and value of life are innate and apply equally to us all — including those who may be disabled, sick or dying. When a society legalizes assisted suicide, it potentially sends a message to vulnerable people that they are a burden and could be thrown away. True dignity is found when the hardship of death is met with love and compassion, not with ending life through artificial means.

Titles aside, it is important to understand how this proposal would work.

After a 15-day waiting period, a legal adult could be prescribed lethal medication if that adult is deemed terminally ill, is considered capable of making decisions, and makes three voluntary requests (two oral and one written). This person could then pick up their prescription at a pharmacy, mix the pills into a cocktail, drink the mixture under their own direction, and if all goes as planned, likely die within three hours. The legislation also makes it a criminal offense to forge documents related to an assisted suicide or coerce another into it, while mandating that assisted suicide be covered through medical insurance.

This proposal has many practical problems. There is no requirement for a mental health screening to ensure someone is truly capable of sound judgment. There is no requirement for the screening to occur in person, making it difficult to detect or prevent coercing someone into suicide against their will. Drugs will not be administered in a controlled setting, which means they could easily be administered improperly and cause great suffering. It also opens the door to people killing themselves in public — the bill even requires the state to reimburse local governments who “incur costs” resulting from an individual terminating their life in a “public place.”

There are glaring medical concerns. No lethal cocktail of drugs is approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, meaning the few states that have legalized assisted suicide are, in effect, experimenting to find the most “efficient” way for patients to kill themselves. Doctors often cannot accurately determine when someone is going to die. Roughly 12-15% of hospice patients will outlive a six-month prognosis, and there are cases when individuals continue to live for many years.

The Michigan State Medical Society and the American Medical Association say: “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.”

Additionally, the relationship between a patient and their health insurance provider would be strained. One prescription of lethal medication is monumentally less expensive than long-term care. Patients want to trust their doctors and insurers — not be suspicious of their motivations.

There also are concerns about what might happen after assisted suicide is legalized. In other jurisdictions allowing it, measures originally adopted as “safeguards” are later characterized as “barriers” and discarded. This includes the elimination or weakening of waiting periods, age limitations, residency requirements and self-administration of medication.

Perhaps the greatest concern is the potential expansion of what constitutes a “terminal illness.”

Some countries have moved to allow mental illness as an allowable reason for assisted suicide. It is also worth noting that, based on surveys in states where assisted suicide is legal, pain is not the primary motivator behind requests. It is more often a loss of autonomy and inability to engage in enjoyable activities. Where is that line drawn?

Once a society becomes comfortable with throwing away human lives, the consequences will reverberate in ways that cannot be predicted. For all of these reasons, I oppose assisted suicide.

State Sen. Thomas Albert represents the 18th District, which includes Barry County and portions of Allegan, Calhoun, Kalamazoo, Kent, and Ionia counties.

Note: A longer version of this column was published on Albert’s ‘First Principles Revisited’ Substack.