.
Feedback

Final Exit Comes to New London to Discuss Right-to-Die Choices

Jerry Metz, Secretary and Medical Director of the Final Exit Network, Speaks to Church Members about End-of-Life Decisions

Calling the right-to-die movement "the 21st century human right," Jerry Metz, M.D. spoke to a group gathered at on Tuesday afternoon about his organization, Final Exit.  Metz discussed the work Final Exit does to help terminally and chronically ill adults choose when they want to die.

According to Metz, the reasons for a person wanting to end his or her life are varied and often complicated.  Ninety-one percent of patients cite the loss of autonomy as a main concern when making end-of-life decisions.  Eighty-eight percent cite the loss of engagement in activities they previously enjoyed.  Only 21% cite pain as a motivating factor.

Even though the right to die is technically considered suicide, Metz made a point to differentiate between the actions of a Final Exit patient's choice and a traditional suicide.  He defined suicide as "the cutting short of an otherwise productive life" and noted that "suicide is a loaded word. It has an image of mental illness."  While Final Exit helps the sick "self-deliver," as the organization's pamphlet states, the organization does not encourage people to commit suicide, does not directly provide the means of death and does not actively engage in the admission of the means of death.

In order to be aided by Final Exit, the seriously ill must submit to a high level of scrutiny and a number of steps are carefully followed.  There are five categories used to differentiate the type of terminal or chronic illness of each potential patient:

Category 1 includes what Metz describes as "a hard diagnosis."  This includes illnesses that can be determined through a physical exam, such as terminal cancer or Lou Gehrig's disease.

Category 2 includes "soft diagnoses," for which there is no clear medical test.  This may include Chronic Fatigue Syndrome or multiple chemical sensitivities.  According to Metz, Final Exit does not deal with those in this category.

Category 3 includes mental illness and "situational distress."  While it is technically possible for someone in this category to be accepted by Final Exit, the standards set by the Final Exit doctors are so strict (chronic depression, multiple hospitalizations, ECT treatment) that no one has yet met the criteria to be considered for further aid.

Two new categories were recently included:  Category P and Category D.  Category P consists of those who have "severe, poorly controlled, chronic pain."  Metz noted that while pain may not indicate terminal illness, these potential patients "are often so medicated that they are essentially zombies."

The newest category, Category D, consists of patients with progressive dementia.  This is a difficult category to assess, because the patient must be lucid enough to understand what the consequences of his or her decision are and ensure that they can themselves operate the equipment which would lead to their death.

Besides being placed into one of the categories of illness, the patients must undergo a series of steps to determine whether or not Final Exit is appropriate for them. 

First, the patient gets in touch with a case coordinator, who becomes the first point of contact.  The case coordinator asks the person to read the book Final Exit before any further decisions are made.  Second, he or she must submit a letter of intent, which demonstrates that the patient is of sound mind and understands his or her impending choice and also describes the person's illness.  Third, the patient will then submit medical records to the Final Exit board of doctors to demonstrate that they are either terminally ill or have permanently lost their quality of life.  After these steps are followed, the board of doctors will determine whether or not they can receive a provisional acceptance.

After meeting with two Final Exit guides, the senior guide makes the final decision as to whether or not the patient can go ahead with their end-of-life plans.  It is at that time that the patient is told how to procure the method of death.  Metz would not discuss what these methods entail, however.  This information is only divulged to those who meet the criteria to continue with their "self-delivery."  The guides and the patient then make sure that the body will be discovered within an acceptable time period if there are no witnesses. 

In the final step, after the patient has "self-delivered," the organization helps protect the guides from prosecution, which occasionally happens.  Charges are pending in Georgia against Final Exit guides who have been charged with assisting in suicide, tampering with evidence (removing the method of death) and, interestingly, RICO statutes, which ensures that the state can freeze Final Exit assets within the state of Georgia.

Allowing one to choose the method of his or her own death is a controversial subject in the United States.  Metz discussed the case of Terri Schiavo, whose husband and parents battled in the courts over whether or not to remove life support from the brain-dead Florida woman.  Still, according to a Harris poll cited by Metz, 70% of Americans believe that a person should be able to choose their method of death.

Because of the possibility of the window of opportunity passing, leading a patient to become unable to make his or her own end-of-life decisions through Final Exit and operate the method of death his or her self, Metz told the listeners to get a living will and a durable power of attorney to ensure their wishes are followed.

It is doubtful that the United States will soon follow in the steps of the Netherlands, where right-to-die has been decriminalized.  However, it remains a serious topic for thought.  If you are interested in learning more about Final Exit, check out their website at: www.finalexitnetwork.org.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from New London Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Kathleen Mitchell May 19, 2013 at 10:45 am
If I read this correctly and, if not, I'm sure someone will correct me, the highlights of this billRead More are (1) It's designed for workers "who do not have access to a retirement plan through their employer" (2) "workers can take their investment with them as they move from job to job." (3) "whatever administrative costs are associated with the plan are charged to the participants themselves, not Connecticut taxpayers." I haven't read the bill yet but I don't see anything in this article by Richard Waselik regarding an employer contribution or match so what is the problem?
Sue P. May 19, 2013 at 10:20 am
Richard, Are you the same Richard that sent a letter to the city council when you became concernedRead More that people that did not work for the city long enough were contributing to the pension plan? I think I have a copy of it somewhere. I think you were concerned that people were getting vested and they were not suppose to be yet.
Doc Halliday May 19, 2013 at 08:23 am
Should the general public be required to support the retirement of our elected/hired governmentRead More officials? Should those retirement checks be based on base salary and not base salary plus overtime/extra pay/bonuses etc? Should ALL government officials be on a 401 system instead of a government (public supported) retirement system? ie: government official retires at 95% pay, in a few years with cost of living increases that official is making more in retirement than when working. The public cannot afford to continue such high retirements. Social Security is being tapped by government officials to pay OTHER items rather than for what it was intended and future retirees who contributed to SS may be left out.
Carol Haley May 17, 2013 at 07:44 am
Pretty funny Spencer. But you don't want a museum there. You need something that generates taxes.Read More Museums are mostly non-profit thereby not generating any taxes. I know you were being funny. I was disgusted to read the developer couldn't show financial backing.
Kathleen Mitchell May 17, 2013 at 05:47 pm
Who would haveever thought of Wasp Spray? When you get the case of spray, be sure and drop a can offRead More at my house;>)
Jeff Brown May 17, 2013 at 03:46 pm
Good article, gonna have to pick up a case of wasp spray!
Carol Haley May 17, 2013 at 12:34 pm
Barbara, I agree with you. But it is probably a lot easier to get an illegal social security numberRead More than we would know. There are two ways of looking at this issue, but my resentment is that I have to pay for them.
Barbara Crocker May 17, 2013 at 07:52 am
But for state aid they would have to have a Social Security number. Bending and breaking laws isRead More how they got here in the first place. The fact that elected officials condone and encourage these laws to be broken is the biggest problem that I have with this whole debacle. "Undocumented residents" place a burden on all of us, and take jobs that could be worked by legal residents. Employers hire illegals (yes I prefer calling them what they are, to hell with being politically correct) because it saves them money, not because "no one else would work these jobs". This is a slap in the face to all of our ancestors who came to this country and followed the rules to become citizens.
Carol Haley May 17, 2013 at 06:51 am
The way things have been going in the eastern part of the United States, as long as the illegals areRead More not breaking the law criminally (motor vehicle is different), they are not arrested for being illegal. Its the illegal immigrants who break the law, such as the large drug bust recently in the papers. As long as they are minding their own business, they get a pass. The only problem I have with illegals is their rush to get on state aid, food stamps, etc. I don't think we should have to support those that choose to live in this country illegally. Becoming a US citizen is not cheap. It is expensive, but it is something that they must work for.
Spencer May 16, 2013 at 04:42 pm
Perhaps because people who vote continue to vote the same way they have for years--and expect to getRead More different results when they do so?
Carol Haley May 15, 2013 at 05:05 pm
Sounds like a bunch of goobledygook to me. And Sue, the Democrats being divided isn't anything newRead More as well as the backstabbing and bs. It's been going on for years. That is one of the reasons I changed to independent a long time ago. I'm presently a Democrat, but changing back to independent as soon as I can get down there.
Felicia Hendersen May 15, 2013 at 09:00 am
Bravo Sue P. And Kathleen I changed the word from "her" to "his". Why shouldRead More people not question the motives of the city council president?
Sue P. May 15, 2013 at 08:53 am
Glad to here that Felicia, I sure hope that you are who you are and not the HE I was told you are.Read More Now is the time to work together and not pick each other apart like the Administration is doing to the Democrat Town Committee.You should see how divided they are and all the back stabbing and bickering that goes on. I say stay clear of that group.
William Desmond May 14, 2013 at 12:47 pm
I must say this has created quite a stir!
Luis Smart May 14, 2013 at 07:04 am
I agree Richard argyle sweaters would have really made it. It is really sad Michael Passero has goneRead More to the dark side and has aligned himself with the administration rather than the people of the city. The one time high vote getter will be all done in November.
Richard Cranium May 13, 2013 at 10:26 pm
I think it is pretty funny although they should be wearing argyle vest sweaters!