Interviews

Kathryn Tucker, JD speaks about Psilocybin with IMmortal Foundation

Read More

Kathryn Tucker, JD speaks about Aid-In-Dying Legislation with IMmortal Foundation

Read More

Dr. Lonny Shavelson speaks about California’s End of Life Option Act (EOLOA) with IMmortal Foundation

Read More

Kathryn Tucker, JD speaks about California’s End of Life Option Act (EOLOA) with IMmortal Foundation

Read More

IMmortal Foundation’s introduction of the End of Life Option Act

The June 9, 2016 implementation of California’s End of Life Option Act [AB-15] presents special challenges for the nation’s most populous state. The strongest opposition to the implementation of California’s Aid-in-Dying Law comes not from the public, nor from political or judicial caveats. Rather, it comes from doctors who assert that this Law violates their Hippocratic Oath and their obligation as doctors to “do no harm” to their patients. The Oath states: “I will use treatment to help the sick according to my ability, but never with a view to injury and wrongdoing. Neither will I administer a poison to anybody when asked to do so, nor will I suggest such a course.” Doctors who oppose the Law regard the writing of lethal prescriptions as a violation of their Oath and their ethical responsibility to help save life. And that “saving life” is a value of such universal importance to the practice of medicine that it should not be overridden by terminally ill patients’ desire to die. Further opposition to the Law comes from hospital rabbis, chaplains, and ministers who consider self-inflicted death a violation of the commandment: “You shall not kill.” The purpose of the Ten Commandments, which, according to the Bible, God gave to Moses on Mount Sinai, is to foster beneficial harmony with God and fellow human beings. Killing oneself, according to the Judeo-Christian tradition, violates God’s law, places human will over Divine will, and causes discord in human relations and with God. So strong is the opposition to AB-15 that this Law has been written in such a way that any doctor and any hospital in California can opt out of implementing it. Doctors and lawyers supporting the Law say that doctors’ and chaplains’ ethics should not be imposed upon or frustrate terminally ill patients’ wish to end their pain and suffering – and that greater harm is done these patients when they are forced to endure further seemingly unbearable misery and diminution of quality of life. Proponents of the Law assert that a patient’s right, in the face of terminal suffering, to choose a peaceful, […]

Read More