Reply #1: I haven't really heard anyone talking about it, but I did see

[SeattleGirl]

that The Times had an article about it.

I agree with your points, rhett. Oregon has had the same law on it's books for several years, and believe me, there have been no mass murders of people with terminal illnesses. That abuse argument is a false argument overall, I believe. For one thing, other people don't get to decide to end someone's life; the ill person does.

Having watched my mother suffer for several years with a debilitating illness, this law makes perfect sense to me. Mom passed away on February 9th. She didn't use medication; she said she wanted her feeding tube taken out. My 4 siblings and I knew what that meant, as that was the only nourishment she was getting. She was tired, and she was ready to go. Yes, she did have an option of medication, as she lived in Oregon, but she didn't have to. If that had ended up being her way, I would have honored that, just as I honor the choice she made.

The only way my mom could have continued to live would have been to stay hooked up to a feeding tube, spending most of her time in bead, nauseated most of the time, short of breath, and sleeping 75% of the time. My mom was a strong, independent woman. Continuing to live that way would have been a death sentence to her soul.

For others to make a literal life and death decision for someone, when that person him/herself is of sound mind, is just flat wrong.