Do you think medical aid in dying (MAID), or physician-assisted suicide, should be legal?

Yes (70%) – "The final weeks, days, of some illnesses are excruciatingly painful. No person should be forced to suffer that pain & indignity. Those who hold beliefs against MAID can choose their own path but they should not be allowed to control the beliefs and actions of another."

• "I don't believe any outside governing body should have the right to dictate what a person can or cannot do to themselves that does not bring harm to others and that includes assisted suicide. We should all be allowed dignity in life and death equally."

"Those diagnosed with terminal illnesses should be able to control how they spend the rest of their lives. If contradicting the medical oath of “doing no harm” is an issues, perhaps a new profession involved with management of MAID should be implemented."

• "If you've never dealt with a loved one suffering for years, you wouldn't understand. Once you have, it's not even a discussion. It's simply _cruel_ not to allow it. And that doesn't even begin to factor in the financial cost."

"Modern medicine has allowed people to live longer but frequently, the question is, "at what cost". My brother passed away from ALS. He was in the hospital for a few weeks with pneumonia. The respiratory therapist was totally incompetent and before she left the room took his B pap off and said she needed a new part. Meanwhile he was gasping for air because he couldn't breathe. Thank goodness I was there and pointed out she was essentially killing him. He was petrified to be admitted to the hospital ever again. It's one example of how a person deserve a peaceful transition rather than being surrounded by an incompetent medical team."

• "I feel that if a person who is in that awful situation wants to take control, then that’s their right. I would maybe add a mandatory counseling piece - not something expansive, but something for them to have an educated and trained ear to listen to them. And without this legislation, they might find other ways to end their life."

"If it is specifically restricted to those with a terminal illness where they are expected to die within 6 months, and they also have safeguards preventing it from being an impulsive decision, I see no reason why people should not be afforded control over the manner in which they pass. There are less reliable and less peaceful routes that people in the same position often take, so it is a beneficial alternative to allow them dignity in passing."

No (19%) – "Despite having no moral issue with medical assisted suicide, there are some issues that could arise as a result of its widespread legalization (e.g. pressure to do it to save money). This would be my biggest concern, and I’d love to see it addressed in a way that shows me that insurance companies cannot influence people in any way. For me, it seems a scary line to cross despite also helping people."

"Our nation's founding principles recognize unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The order matters. Liberty is a precious good, but it rests upon a more fundamental commitment to the value and protection of human life. A society that treats death as a solution to suffering risks elevating autonomy above the very life that makes liberty possible. While terminal suffering calls for deep compassion, intentionally ending a human life undermines the principle that people possess value independent of their abilities, health, or level of autonomy. I would rather see the United States respond to suffering with care: through expanded hospice services, stronger palliative care, better mental health and existential support, and greater resources for patients and families facing serious illness.  

(continued) I say this as someone living with Stage IV cancer. From the outside, Medical Aid in Dying can seem compassionate and even helpful. But when you are the one living with a terminal diagnosis, you become acutely aware of how vulnerable people can be to despair, isolation, fear of being a burden, and the subtle message that their lives are no longer worth living. The better question is not, "How can we help someone die?" but rather, "How can we help someone live as well as possible, for as long as possible, even in the face of terminal illness?" Our answer should be more care, more support, and more dignity—not a faster path to death."

Unsure/other (11%) – "I voted "uncertain" because I genuinely am uncertain about the issue. On one hand I thoroughly understand some religious and physicians' groups who oppose it; afterall are not physicians required to take the Hippocratic Oath, part of which states "Do no harm"; assisting someone to end their life seems to me to be an ultimate harm. I also thoroughly understand the arguments made by groups advocating for those who live with disabilities/challenges.... history is replete with examples where "compassionate" laws were turned into a very dark thing against such populations. AND, on the other hand I thoroughly understand why people with terminal illnesses should be extended this opportunity. I actually have several friends in other countries that had terrible terminal illnesses and they were able to take advantage of physician assisted end of life in a peaceful environment. So I can see the validity on both sides of the issue, but which is the higher moral one I really can't say."