Vermont recently made history by becoming the first state in the U.S. to allow non-residents to use medical assistance to end their lives. Governor Phil Scott signed a bill into law, permitting physicians to prescribe lethal medication to adult patients who reside outside the state. The legislation requires patients to have a terminal diagnosis and seek counsel from two doctors before the medication can be prescribed. The decision also mandates a 48-hour waiting period, and patients must be able to self-administer the medication.
The mandate was passed after an agreement was reached with a Connecticut woman with terminal cancer who challenged the residency requirement clause. The state’s law stating that a patient must have been a resident of the state for six months has been removed, allowing patients from other states to travel to Vermont for medical care. Supporters of medically-assisted suicide believe that patients should have the right to travel to other states to receive end-of-life care, while opponents argue that a lack of residency requirement could lead to assisted suicide tourism.
This bill requires patients to make two oral requests to die to their physician over at least two weeks and submit a written signed request. Two witnesses must attest there was no duress or undue influence. The legislation allows approved individuals, who must be at least 18 years of age, have less than six months to live, and be considered mentally competent by two sets of doctors, access to a prescription that can end their life.
Currently, only ten states in the U.S. allow euthanasia, with legislation being considered in Hawaii and New York. Vermont’s recent change in law has been welcomed by Compassion & Choices, a US advocacy group for those wishing to access such services. However, critics argue that states could become “assisted suicide tourism destinations.”
Assisted suicide is a contentious issue with the medical establishment, religious groups, and disability rights advocates raising concerns that such laws are open to abuse and apply too few controls. Some worry that by legalizing medically-assisted suicide, it may lead to elderly and disabled people being viewed as a burden.
While Vermont’s law has stringent safeguards to protect vulnerable patients from coercion, there are still concerns that liability for the state could arise if the drugs fail to end a patient’s life.
Despite criticism from some and praise from others, Vermont’s decision to allow non-residents to access medical assistance to end their lives marks a significant moment in U.S. history. It is yet to be seen if other states will follow in their footsteps to remove residency as a requirement in assisted suicide legislation.
In conclusion, Vermont’s recent decision to remove residency as a requirement in assisted suicide legislation allows non-residents to access medical assistance to end their lives. Some have praised the decision, arguing that patients should have the right to travel to other states to receive end-of-life care. Nonetheless, there are concerns from some critics that by legalizing medically-assisted suicide, it may lead to vulnerable patients being coerced to end their lives. Despite this, Vermont’s decision marks a significant moment in U.S. history and will likely start discussions on whether other states will follow in their footsteps.
