Oregon joined only four other states in earning an “A” grade in a major national study of state pain policies, according to a report released today. Researchers from the University of Wisconsin’s Pain & Policy Studies Group evaluated whether each state’s pain management regulations make it easy or difficult to access pain care. It also measures state progress to increase pain management and lower policy barriers. Oregon’s high standing is additional evidence of the state’s excellent pain management, thanks in large part to the Death with Dignity Act. The aid-in-dying law has galvanized end-of-life care in areas ranging from pain care management to participation in hospice. Oregon’s high grade on the pain care report reinforces this fact. Washington improved over last year but rated a lower grade of B+, indicating it could stand to learn from Oregon’s example by passing Initiative I-1000 this November. The study was funded by the American Cancer Society, the Lance Armstrong Foundation (LAF) and Susan G. Komen for the Cure. Preparations on Montana case continue as hearing approaches Kathryn Tucker, Compassion & Choices Legal Director, and her co-counsel in the Baxter v. Montana case, are gearing up for the case’s hearing, which is slated for October. In this case, two terminally ill Montanans, four distinguished Montana physicians, and Compassion & Choices are suing the state of Montana for the right to die on their own terms. Robert Baxter, 75, a retired truck driver from Billings, and Steven Stoelb, 53, a former logger and forest technician from Livingston, are represented by Kathryn Tucker, Legal Affairs Director for Compassion & Choices, and Mark S. Connell, a renowned Missoula litigation attorney. Baxter suffers from lymphocytic leukemia and Stoelb has Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome. The case contends that competent terminally ill Montanans are guaranteed privacy and dignity by the Montana State Constitution. These guarantees protect the right of such patients to control their own death by obtaining medications from their physician to enable the patient to achieve a peaceful death, if they so choose. The suit challenges Montana’s homicide statutes on several grounds under the Montana Constitution. As Tucker discussed in detail in an article recently published in the Montana Law Review, that state’s law is unusually protective of individual liberty, privacy, dignity and autonomy. “Ample precedent supports a finding that the claimed right is indeed protected,” Tucker says. “We are optimistic that a favorable ruling will issue from the trial court soon after the Oct. 10 hearing. Whatever the decision reached by the lower court, it is likely the case will be appealed to the Montana Supreme Court for review.”

Preparations on Montana case continue as hearing approaches

Kathryn Tucker, Compassion & Choices Legal Director, and her co-counsel in
the Baxter v. Montana case, are gearing up for the case’s hearing, which is
slated for October.

In this case, two terminally ill Montanans, four distinguished Montana
physicians, and Compassion & Choices are suing the state of Montana for the
right
to die on their own terms. Robert Baxter, 75, a retired truck driver from
Billings, and Steven Stoelb, 53, a former logger and forest technician from
Livingston, are represented by
Kathryn Tucker, Legal Affairs Director for Compassion & Choices, and Mark S.
Connell, a renowned Missoula litigation attorney. Baxter suffers from
lymphocytic leukemia and Stoelb has Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome.

The case contends that competent terminally ill Montanans are guaranteed
privacy and dignity by the Montana State Constitution. These guarantees
protect
the right of such patients to control their own death by obtaining
medications
from their physician to enable the patient to achieve a peaceful death, if
they so choose.

The suit challenges Montana’s homicide statutes on several grounds under the
Montana Constitution. As Tucker discussed in detail in an article recently
published in the Montana Law Review, that state’s law is unusually protective
of individual liberty,
privacy, dignity and autonomy. “Ample precedent supports a finding that the
claimed right is indeed protected,” Tucker says. “We are optimistic that a
favorable ruling will issue from
the trial court soon after the Oct. 10 hearing. Whatever the decision
reached by the lower court, it is likely the case will be appealed to the Montana
Supreme Court for review.”

In July, C&CNY Executive Director David Leven spoke to 65 trial lawyers at
the American Association for Justice conference in Philadelphia on bringing
cases for inadequate pain management and failure to respect end-of-life
choices. The right to have effective pain management is increasingly being
recognized and legal redress is sometimes appropriate when physicians fail in their
obligation to provide effective pain management to their patients. Similarly
doctors should be held accountable when they fail to respect and honor the
end-of-life wishes of their patients.