You are here

Responses

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Original research
Oregon Death with Dignity Act access: 25 year analysis
Compose a Response to This Article
Compose Response

More information about text formats

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

PLEASE NOTE:

  • A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
  • We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
  • Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
  • By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on: 27 October 2023
    Claims and Facts about Oregon's Death with Dignity Act at 25 years
    • Nicholas L. Gideonse, Hospice Medical Director, Associate Professor of Family Medicine Oregon Health & Science University
    • Other Contributors:
      • Barbara Coombs Lee, President Emerita/Senior Adviser

    This article provides a simplistic perspective, relying heavily on correlation, not causation, to make unproven claims about Oregon’s medical aid-in-dying law and erroneously comparing it to euthanasia laws outside the United States.

    Claim: “...there was an increase in patients feeling a burden and describing financial concerns as reasons for choosing an assisted death.” (p. 1) “Detailed studies are needed to explain the marked change in medical funding for PAS patients in Oregon.” (p. 5)

    Facts: While the Oregon Health Authority (OHA) reports insurance status, it doesn’t report whether patients used their insurance for medical aid in dying. Only 5.1% of people in Oregon who qualified for medical aid in dying since 1998 noted the financial burden among their reasons for requesting it.

    Claim: "The 2022 report states that the combinations [of medications] have resulted in longer times from ingestion to death…" (p. 3)

    Facts: The median time has risen, but it is still typically less than an hour from ingestion to death. Very few patients experience a significant delay between ingestion and death. Otherwise, there would be a higher median time.

    Claim: “Unfortunately the destruction of OHA records after 1 year makes retrospective analysis impossible.” (p. 4).

    Facts: OHA’s public explanation: “The State KC does collect the names of patients in order to cross-check death certificates. However, the law guarantees the confidential...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.