Dan Savage is exasperated over arguments such as Douthat's:
Because some indecent people might abuse legal physician-assisted suicide, which hasn't happened in Oregon or Washington state, decent people must watch their loved ones die in agony. My mother's suffering? Her terror and panic in the last conscious moments of her life? A small price to pay, as far as social conservatives are concerned, to protect vulnerable hypotheticals. … Actual physician-assisted suicide, with its rules and regulations, has been legal in Oregon since 1994, in Washington since 2008, and Douthat's fears—which can only be addressed by imposing his values and religious prejudices on others (convenient!)—have not been realized.
Dan's moving account of his mother's passing is worth your time. A snippet related to the discussion at hand:
"You don't know how you're going to feel at the end of your life," the widow planning to vote for I-1000 [that would legalize physician assisted suicide] says. "I want to have the choices available to me."
Choices.
Exactly. If I-1000 is approved by Washington State voters, the widow opposed to the initiative will not be compelled to end her life with the assistance of a physician. She can choose pain meds and the love of caregivers and die a "natural" death. (What's so "natural" about pain management anyway?) But if I-1000 is rejected, the widow who plans to vote in favor of it will not have the same choice. She will not be able to choose to end her life, and end her suffering, if the pain becomes too much for her to bear.
That's what the debate about I-1000 is really all about: your body, your death, your choice.
The Dish 