Jesse Bedayn
AP
Updated 6:39 PM EDT, April 12, 2024
On a brisk day at a restaurant outside Chicago, Deb Robertson sat with her teenage grandson to talk about her death.
She’ll probably miss his high school graduation. She declined the extended warranty on her car. Sometimes she wonders who will be at her funeral.
Those things don’t frighten her much. The 65-year-old didn’t cry when she learned two months ago that the cancerous tumors in her liver were spreading, portending a tormented death.
But later, she received a call. A bill moving through the Illinois Legislature to allow certain terminally ill patients to end their own lives with a doctor’s help had made progress.
Then she cried.
“Medical-aid in dying is not me choosing to die,” she says she told her 17-year-old grandson. “I am going to die. But it is my way of having a little bit more control over what it looks like in the end.”
Here is a summary:
The article discusses the ethical and moral debate surrounding physician-assisted death (PAD), also known as medical aid in dying (MAiD). It highlights the desire of terminally ill patients for more control over their end-of-life experience, including the option for a peaceful death facilitated by a doctor.
On one hand, the article presents the perspective of patients like Deb Robertson, who argues that MAiD isn't about choosing to die, but about choosing how to die with dignity on their own terms, avoiding prolonged suffering.
On the other hand, the patchwork of laws across different states raises ethical concerns. Some states are considering legalizing MAiD, while others are proposing stricter bans. This creates a situation where some patients have to travel to distant states or forgo their wishes entirely.
The article doesn't take a definitive stance on the morality of MAiD, but rather presents the arguments on both sides, leaving the reader to consider the complex ethical questions surrounding end-of-life decisions.
