To the editor:

On Nov. 4, Washingtonians will have the opportunity to vote on Initiative 1000, the “Death With Dignity Initiative.”

If passed it will allow terminally ill adults an additional end-of-life choice by making it legal for them, under carefully controlled and specific conditions and procedures, to obtain life-ending medications from a doctor, which they could take if they wish.

The proposed law is essentially identical to that which has been the law in the state of Oregon for about 10 years. It is worth noting that none of the dire negative consequences of the Oregon law, predicted by opponents in Oregon, came to pass.

I was listening to a debate on KUOW radio a few weeks ago between two doctors, taking different sides on this issue.

The doctor opposed to Initiative 1000 said he felt that to prescribe medications which someone could take to end their life would be in violation of his oath to protect and do no harm to his patients.

First of all, the proposed law is clear that any medical provider could decline, for whatever reason, ethical, spiritual or personal, to cooperate with terminally-ill individuals seeking medications under this law.

It seems me the “Death with Dignity” law will enhance the ability of doctors to respond to the needs of their patients.

Is there not a time in the course of some medical conditions, advanced cancer in particular, in which the desire of the patient to end their life, legally and in consultation with their doctors and loved ones, is a reasonable desire? We all believe that mentally competent adults have the right to seek and refuse medical care as they feel it serves in their best interest. I see the “Death With Dignity” law as an expansion of an individual’s personal medical rights and as a doctor would want the possibility to legally serve my patient in this way.

On the same radio program the same doctor made the claim that advances in modern pain management and palliative care make I-1000 unnecessary. There have been major improvements in end-of-life care in recent years. We should all be grateful to the many doctors, researchers, nurses and hospice workers who have contributed to these advances and who give of themselves to their patients every day.

In no way do I believe most or many terminally-ill individuals would or should choose to end their life with legally obtained medications. I am sure that many fewer individuals will make use of the provisions of I-1000 than would have in years past.

Indeed, one of the surprises in Oregon has been how few people have chosen to end their lives under the provisions of this law.

I believe, from personal experience with the death of loved ones, that there are distinct limits to the ability of medicine to keep people free of extreme suffering, let alone in any condition remotely close to a worthwhile quality of life.

Experts agree that about 5 percent of the terminally ill cannot be helped with even the most advanced pain medications. These people deserve the option of Initiative 1000. Please vote for the “Death with Dignity Initiative.”

John Goertzel

Langley