The House Human Services Committee passed a bill out to the Judiciary Committee on Tuesday that would give physicians immunity from disciplinary action for prescribing a lethal dose of medication to a terminally ill patient, if the doctor followed strict procedures and if the patient requested the medication.
Unlike the Senate, the House Human Services Committee’s 7-4 vote was split along party lines. Reps. Anne Donahue of Northfield, Lynn Batchelor of Derby Line, Thomas Burditt of West Rutland, and Francis “Topper” McFaun of Barre Town all caucus with the Republican Party and all voted against the bill.
“I’m very much against this bill … I don’t think the government should be in the business of granting absolution for killing somebody, and that’s pretty much what this bill does,” Batchelor said. “I spoke to an oncologist yesterday … and he said, ‘If you think there are not going to be abuses with this bill, no matter how many roadblocks you have, you’re sadly mistaken. You’re working with human beings … and there are not enough safeguards in any bill to make this a good bill.’”
When the Senate took a similar 20-plus-page bill and stripped it down to one page, senators of all political stripes stood strongly for and against the procedure-heavy language, which is based on an Oregon law. Although the Senate passed a much different version of the bill, House Human Services went back to the Oregon-based language that the Senate Health and Welfare Committee originally recommended to the Senate.
The seven Human Services Committee members, who voted for the bill, caucus with the Democrats — including the committee’s Vice Chair Rep. Sandy Haas, who is a Progressive from Rochester.
Rep. Patsy French, D-Randolph, told the committee that she thinks the bill is sound and gives Vermonters greater choice at the end of their lives.
“This committee has worked very hard on advanced directives, palliative care and hospice care … and to know when is an appropriate time to use it,” she said. “I think this adds one more step many Vermonters would like to have as a choice, whether they use it or not … (and) I think it has good protections. I honestly don’t believe somebody will be able to be coerced into doing this. There are so many people checking along the way. This bill does what I would like have done to me.”
The bill is moving onto the House Judiciary Committee, where on Friday committee Chair Rep. Bill Lippert, D-Hinesburg, expects a bill to pass out to the floor.
