Approximately 70 million Americans in nine states have the right to medical aid in dying if they become terminally ill.
Our mission: A medical aid in dying law to establish compassionate end-of-life options for terminally ill Arizonans who so wish.
About Arizona End-of-Life Options
An Arizona Medical Aid in Dying Law
Arizona End-of-Life Options is a grassroots volunteer coalition, organized to gain passage of a state medical aid in dying law making it possible for terminally ill Arizona residents to legally obtain medications that eliminate undue and prolonged suffering at the end of life.
The proposed legislation is modeled after time-tested laws already in effect in Oregon, Washington, California, Colorado, New Jersey, Vermont, Maine, Hawaii, and the District of Columbia (Montana also has it by court decision).
As is true in all these states, utilizing this end of life option will be straightforward and easy to understand. Yet it will include many legal, medical and ethical safeguards to prevent abuse or misuse. These safeguards have been proven effective for over two decades since the first such law took effect in Oregon in 1997.
A Majority of Arizonans Support a Medical Aid in Dying Law
It’s a Matter of Fundamental Human Rights
This is not a liberal or conservative issue — it is a human rights issue! Unfortunately, the primary opposition (which has vastly greater funds than we do) wants to impose its beliefs on all of us. That is not compatible with the fundamental principles of liberty upon which this country is founded.
We are the opposite. Medical aid in dying laws do not require anyone, whether patient or health care provider, to participate. Such laws support individual freedom and self-determination.
In the words of the Federal Ninth Circuit (which includes Arizona) in Compassion in Dying v. Washington, 1996:
“Those who believe strongly that death must come without physician assistance should be free to follow that creed, whether they be doctors or patients. But they should not be free to force their views, their religious convictions, or their philosophies on all other members of a democratic society, nor should they be free to compel those whose values differ from theirs to die painful, protracted, and agonizing deaths.” — Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals