End-of life realities
Hey savvy news reader! Thanks for choosing local.
You are now reading
1 of 3 free articles.
State Senator Carl Glimm has introduced legislation (SB 210) that would inject the government into end-of-life medical decisions. I agree with those who oppose this legislation on the grounds that it would violate a fundamental freedom under Montana law that people, in consultation with their physicians, should have the right to make their own medical care decisions. But it also would expand an already huge quagmire of litigation traps that physicians face and thus affect their medical decisions in a way that would be negative for patients.
Although I like to protect my privacy, I write this because last April I was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. My doctors remain uncertain about how long I will live - six months, a year, who knows? I am not complaining and please no sympathy. At 82 years I have had a very happy and productive life without any significant health issues.
When my cancer was diagnosed, I immediately faced a life and death decision: should I have a major operation to remove the cancer? The operation might have extended my life expectancy. But after consultations with three medical specialists, I decided not to undergo the invasive and risky surgery because it had only a 30% chance of success. Quality of life considerations played a major role in my decision.
My cancer disrupts my digestive system. After diagnosis, I lost 40 pounds and experienced two bouts of severe pain requiring hospitalization. My doctors have implemented modern medical procedures to slow the impact of the growing cancer. But eventually I will be faced with my final end-of- life decisions.
I may want to receive more medication to alleviate pain in full recognition that that medication might shorten my life. But I am very concerned that passage of the Glimm legislation will force my doctors to give more weight to their legal liability considerations when prescribing medications. Would a doctor face litigation and possible prosecution if his or her decision appeared to give precedence to my priorities? Many lawyers and perhaps government prosecutors may say yes indeed.
I encourage Montana legislators to vote no.
Dick Erb
Moiese
