We Mourn the Death of Stephen Mendelsohn

By Alex Schadenberg, Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition (EPC).*

The amazing genius and focused disability activist, Stephen Mendelsohn, age 63 [pictured right], worked tirelessly to oppose assisted suicide as a member of Second Thoughts Connecticut and as a member of the EPC - USA board, has died.

According to a media report Stephen Mendelsohn died when he was hit by a car on Sunday evening (June 1).

Mendelsohn was an incredible researcher. He would read through legislative texts and uncover specific language variations that may not have been noticed immediately. Also, the interventions that he wrote opposing assisted suicide bills often used new talking points and ways to oppose killing by assisted suicide.

CT Legislature Won’t Consider Medical Aid in Dying Bill

[State Representative Josh] Elliott had introduced the bill this year alongside two colleagues, but it was not raised by the General Assembly’s Public Health Committee before a deadline to advance it further.* 

CT Insider reported in 2024 that Elliott and advocates planned to skip that year’s session in the hopes of taking it up again this year.

The legislation would have brought Connecticut in line with 10 states and the District of Columbia in allowing doctors to prescribe medication for patients to end their own lives. Those states and D.C. require patients to have been diagnosed as having a short time to live from a terminal illness. The laws also require patients to be determined to be of sound mind and capable of informed consent.

Advocates on both sides of the debate over the practice responded Thursday.

“Second Thoughts Connecticut was glad to hear that our state legislature continues to move cautiously when it comes to medical assisted suicide,” said Cathy Ludlum  [pictured above] of Second Thoughts Connecticut, a group of disability rights advocates opposed to the legalization of assisted suicide.  “Legislators have wisely stopped it from coming here this year, and we are thankful,” Ludlum said. “People in distress need support, not a fast-track to death.”

Elaine Kolb Performs “Not Dead Yet”

By Jules Good, 02/08/23

Last week, NDY ally Elaine Kolb performed an original song at the press conference hosted in part by Second Thoughts CT to highlight the dangers of the proposed CT assisted suicide legalization bill. Check out the video to see her speech and performance: https://youtu.be/AnaQhlmVt68

Video Transcript:

My name is Elaine Kolb. I'm 64 as in, "Will you still need me? Will you still feed me when I'm 64?" Well I am. When I first heard that song I thought it was gonna be a long time before I was 64, but here I am. 

On September 30th, 1977, I was 28 years old and a stranger came up to me and grabbed me, attempted robbery, stabbed me in the back. Up till then I, if anything, I was abnormally healthy. I'd never even had a broken bone. The only time I was in the hospital was when I was born and to get my tonsils out.

There I was, almost died, had a spinal cord injury. They didn't think I'd ever walk again. Well, medicine is wonderful but there's a reason why they say it's still practicing. They are still practicing. They don't know. They're just trying to figure it out best they can and do the best they can under the circumstances. But they don't know. You can't say whether somebody's gonna live or die for sure. Some people seem to be just fine. My sister had surgery yesterday and last night they said she was just fine and then she had a blood clot and they took her back in for another surgery. And as far as I know, she's fine and in intensive care, but you don't know these things.

That's why this is so important because real people are in real agony at times and we don't know what to do. And we look to medical experts and they do the best they can, but they don't know either. This is very emotional for me because it was 15 years ago last Monday, March 10th, when my partner Patty Deke, we had been together for 11 and a half years, when she died at hospice in Branford. And it's one of the many blessings of my life that I got to be there holding her hand when she died. But she lived her whole life under a death sentence. 

Jeanette Hall, Compassion & Choices Creamed, and Why We Must Go Forward to Avoid the Way of the Dinosaur

By Margaret Dore, Esq.

This document is a shorter and more formal version of my presentation at the Caring About Everyone Conference in Hartford Connecticut, on October 15, 2022. The conference was generously sponsored by the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition and the Family Institute of Connecticut.

About Me

I am an attorney licensed to practice law in Washington State. I have been working against assisted suicide and euthanasia since 2008. I am also president of Choice is an Illusion and the Foundation for Choice is an Illusion.

Other than temporary absences, I have lived in Seattle all of my life, except for the last two years due to civil unrest, lockdowns, forced masking, etc.

Join Margaret Dore and Other Featured Speakers Opposing Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia. An In-Person and Online Event

Margaret Dore:  "It's been a long time since a lot of us have seen each other. Thank you to the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition and the Family Institute of Connecticut for sponsoring this event!"

The Event:  Caring About Everyone, EPC-USA Anti-Assisted Suicide Conference.

Keynote Speaker:  Wesley J. Smith, contributor to The Corner at National Review and a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute's Center on Human Exceptionalism.   

Maybe You Trust Your Kids, But What About Your Son's New Wife?

My name is Margaret Dore. I am a licensed attorney and president of Choice is an Illusion, a nonprofit corporation opposed to assisted suicide and euthanasia. I have personally testified in 20 U.S. legislatures, including Connecticut, and also internationally. I oppose Raised Bill No. 88.

Yesterday, I submitted a formal legal analysis detailing problems with the proposed Act, that it is not what it's sold to be.

I also encourage you to look at my website, which has an online version of my analysis, which can be viewed here 

Protect Yourselves and the People You Care About; Don't Let Them Become Sitting Ducks to Predators

Click here to read the pdf version.

I. INTRODUCTION

I am an attorney and president of Choice is an Illusion, a nonprofit corporation opposed to assisted suicide and euthanasia. I have personally appeared and testified against these practices in 20 US states and also internationally.[1]  

The proposed Act, Raised Bill No. 88, seeks to legalize physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia as those terms are traditionally defined.[2] This will be on both a voluntary and involuntary basis.

The Act is based on similar acts in Oregon and Washington State. I urge you to protect yourselves and the people you care about. Vote “No” to reject Raised Bill No. 88. 

Assisted Suicide Bill 6425 Has Died

by Alex Schadenberg

Elaine Kolb & Second Thoughts
 Connecticut

For original article, click here.

Connecticut assisted suicide Bill HB 6425 died today. It dies along with the other previous bills that have been debated every year since 2013. Other than reading articles from the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition or other similar groups, you will not hear about the death of the Connecticut bill.

Connecticut remains a special place with the disability rights group, Second Thoughts Connecticut, the Family Institute of Connecticut, and several other groups, who may disagree on many issues but can work together to oppose assisted suicide.

Hearing Today: Tell the Connecticut Public Health Committee to Reject Assisted Suicide & Euthanasia

Jeanette Hall

"Don't render yourselves, and the people you care about, sitting ducks to heirs and other predators."

By Margaret Dore, Esq.

To read Dore's analysis opposing Raised Bill No. 6425, click here and here.

1.  The Bill

The proposed bill, "An Act Concerning Aid in Dying for the Terminally Ill," seeks   to legalize “aid in dying,” which is a euphemism for active euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide.[1] 

Assisted Suicide Bill HB 5420 Dead for Now

Stephen Mendelsohn

Stephen Mendelsohn:

We still need to be concerned about a special session, but for now, 8 years with no bill passing a single committee.

Story below courtesy of Connecticut News Junkie:

HARTFORD, CT — They never expected it to end like this, but legislative leaders decided Monday that it’s not safe for them to return to the state Capitol before the constitutional adjournment of May 6.

Legislators Need to See Our Tears

Author testifying in 2015

By Cathy Ludlum

American democracy is based on the idea that the voices of the people matter. As legislators struggle with difficult issues, trying to balance the needs of conflicting constituencies and solve complicated problems, they need to hear the perspectives of the people most directly affected.

This is why they listen to hour after hour of in-person testimony. Written testimony has its place. Studies and charts provide important information; but being in the presence of the people, hearing their passion, and sometimes seeing their tears brings us together as human beings and makes it possible for legislators to make the best decisions.

Euthanasia Bill Introduced

On March 2, 2020, assisted suicide and euthanasia bill HB 5420 was introduced and referred to the Joint Committee on Public Health. For the text of the bill click here.

A public hearing was scheduled for March 16, 2020, but was cancelled due to Corona virus concerns.

Aid-In-Dying Fails To Get A Vote

HARTFORD, CT—Connecticut will not be one of the state’s to adopt aid-in-dying legislation as its chief proponent threw in the towel Monday, not allowing the bill to come up for vote in front of the Public Health Committee.

“We just didn’t have the votes,” Rep. Jonathan Steinberg, D-Westport, co-chair of the committee said.

He said it also won’t be an issue next year since the membership of the committee won’t change.

Reject Act Concerning Aid in Dying (Bill 5898)

 

Margaret and Elaine Kolb

By Margaret Dore, Esq, MBA

1. The Act 

The Act seeks to legalize “aid in dying,” a traditional euphemism for active euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide.[1] 

2. Who May Be Most at at Risk?

Individuals with money, meaning the middle class and above. 

People With Disabilities Are a High Risk Group for Suicide; Legal Assisted Suicide Discussed as a Contributing Factor.

By Margaret Dore

Thank you Stephen Mendelsohn, of Second Thoughts Connecticut, for providing this important

Stephen Mendelsohn

news.

The State of Connecticut Suicide Prevention Plan for 2020 includes people with disabilities and chronic health conditions as a high-risk group (similar to military veterans or the LGBT community) and discusses assisted suicide as a possible contributing factor to the problem. The Plan states:

Assisted Suicide Bill Dead!

Assisted suicide bill won't be voted on by Connecticut legislative committee this session

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS, March 25, 2014 - 7:32 pm EDT

HARTFORD, Connecticut. A bill that would allow Connecticut physicians to prescribe medication to help terminally ill patients end their lives won't be voted on during this year's legislative session, the co-chairman of the General Assembly's Public Health Committee said Tuesday.

Don't Make Oregon's Mistake

http://www.journalinquirer.com/opinion/letters_to_the_editor/march-letters/article_ea92adaa-a38d-11e3-9790-001a4bcf887a.html (last letter)

I am a doctor in Oregon, where physician assisted-suicide is legal. I understand that Connecticut’s legislature is considering taking a similar step.

I was first exposed to this issue in 1982, shortly before my first wife died of cancer. We had just visited her doctor. As we were leaving, he had suggested that she overdose herself on medication. I still remember the look of horror on her face. She said, “Ken, he wants me to kill myself.”

Our assisted-suicide law was passed in 1997. In 2000, one of my patients was adamant she would use our law. Over three or four visits, I stalled her and ultimately convinced her to be treated instead. Nearly 14 years later she is thrilled to be alive.

In Oregon, the combination of assisted-suicide legalization and prioritized medical care based on prognosis has created a danger for my patients on the Oregon Health Plan (Medicaid). Helpful treatments are often not covered. The plan will cover the patient’s suicide.

For more details, read my affidavit filed on behalf of the Canadian government at http://maasdocuments.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/signed-stevens-aff-9-18-12.pdf

Protect your health care. Tell your legislators to vote no on assisted suicide. Don’t make Oregon’s mistake.

Kenneth Stevens

Sherwood, Ore.

"I was afraid to leave my husband alone"

Letter from Oregon resident, Kathryn Judson, Published in the Hawaii Free Press, February 15, 2011.

To view the original letter,click here and scroll down towards the bottom of the page.   

When my husband was seriously ill several years ago, I collapsed in a half-exhausted heap in a chair once I got him into the doctor's office, relieved that we were going to get badly needed help (or so I thought).

To my surprise and horror, during the exam I overheard the doctor giving my husband a sales pitch for assisted suicide. 'Think of what it will spare your wife, we need to think of her' he said, as a clincher.

Now, if the doctor had wanted to say 'I don't see any way I can help you, knowing what I know, and having the skills I have' that would have been one thing. If he'd wanted to opine that certain treatments weren't worth it as far as he could see, that would be one thing. But he was tempting my husband to commit suicide. And that is something different.

I was indignant that the doctor was not only trying to decide what was best for David, but also what was supposedly best for me (without even consulting me, no less).

We got a different doctor, and David lived another five years or so. But after that nightmare in the first doctor's office, and encounters with a 'death with dignity' inclined nurse, I was afraid to leave my husband alone again with doctors and nurses, for fear they'd morph from care providers to enemies, with no one around to stop them.

It's not a good thing, wondering who you can trust in a hospital or clinic. I hope you are spared this in Hawaii.

Kathryn Judson, Oregon

CONNECTICUT COURT DISMISSES “AID IN DYING” CASE

By Margaret Dore

On June 2, 2010, the Connecticut Superior Court dismissed Blick v. Connecticut, an "aid in dying" case.  "Aid in dying" is a euphemism for physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia.[1]  As used in the case, aid in dying refered to physician-assisted suicide.

Case History

In Connecticut, assisting a suicide is prohibited by two statutes: Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-54a, which prohibits intentionally causing a suicide "by force, duress or deception"; and Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-56, which prohibits intentionally causing a suicide "other than by force, duress or deception." Neither statute contains an exception for physician-assisted suicide.

On October 7, 2009, the former Hemlock Society, now known as Compassion & Choices, announced the lawsuit.  The claim was that § 53a-56 does not reach a physician who provides "aid in dying" because aid in dying is not "suicide."  See Verified Complaint, ¶ 40.  The complaint also implied that the patients at issue would be "dying." This would not necessarily be the case. See Opinion letter here:  http://www.euthanasiaprevention.on.ca/ConnMemo02.pdf.

On June 2, 2010, the Court dismissed the case.  The Court specifically disagreed with the claim that "aid in dying" is not "suicide."  The Court stated: 

"[T]he legislature intended the statute to apply to physicians who assist a suicide and intended the term "suicide" to include self-killing by those who are suffering from unbearable terminal illness.

The language and legislative history of § 53a-56 compel the conclusion that the defendants [state’s attorneys] would not be acting in excess of their authority if they prosecuted the plaintiffs under § 53a-56 for providing 'aid in dying.'"[2] 

The Court also stated that the claim was not justiciable and that any change in the law would be a task for the legislature.[3]  The Court said that the legislature's participation was particularly important given "significant . . . concerns" about physician-assisted suicide.[4]  These concerns include whether assisted suicide "threatens . . . the poor, the elderly and the disabled."[5]

The Court also found that the lawsuit was barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity.[6]  The Court concluded: "The case is hereby dismissed because it is barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity and, as stated above, it presents a nonjusticiable claim, one which must be decided by the Connecticut legislature, and not by the court."[7]

Not Dead Yet’s running commentary on the case can be viewed here.  The verified complaint, the parties’ briefing and the Court’s decision can be viewed below as indicated:

Verified Complaint, filed October 2009.

Memorandum in Support of Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, dated November 19, 2009.

Plaintiffs’ Memorandum of Law if Opposition to Motion to Dismiss, dated January 4, 2010

Reply Memorandum of Law in Support of Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, dated February 11, 2010.

Memorandum of Decision on Motion to Dismiss, dated June 1, 2010 and filed on June 2, 2010 (dismissing the case).

---

[1]  The term, "aid in dying" means both euthanasia and assisted suicide.  See the "Model Aid-in-Dying Act" published in the Iowa Law Review at: http://www.uiowa.edu/~sfklaw/euthan.html.  Note the letters "euthan" in the link.  The Act's definition of "aid-in-dying" describes euthanasia.  Section 1-102(3) states: "‘Aid-in-dying’ means . . . the administration of a qualified drug for the purpose of inducing death." See also video transcript of Barbara Wagner,
http://www.katu.com/news/26119539.html?video=YHI&t=a (last visited Sept. 24, 2010) ("‘physician aid in dying’ [is] better known as assisted suicide").
[2] Blick & Levine v. Office of the Division of Criminal Justice, et. al. (Blick v. Connecticut)(Conn. Super. Ct), CV-09-5033392, Memorandum of Decision on Motion to Dismiss, filed June 2, 2010, at 25. 
[3] Id., Memorandum of Decision on Motion to Dismiss, at 16, middle paragraph.  
[4] Id., at bottom.
[5] Id., at 17.
[6] Id., at 21-25. 
[7] Id., at 26.