February 9, 2025
Republican led Montana Moves to Shelve its Assisted Dying Law
Darrell Ehrlick reports:
Currently, physician-assisted aid in dying in Montana occupies a legal grey area.
A 2009 Montana Supreme Court ruling said a physician can raise a defense in a homicide case, saying that a patient consented and sought out the drugs, but the high court said it was ultimately up to the Legislature to make the final decision on the legality of physician assistance in suicide.
On Friday, the Montana Senate passed Senate Bill 136, which would disallow patient consent as a defense to physician-assisted aid in dying, effectively giving physicians no legal protection if they participated in administering drugs that would end a terminally ill patient’s life.
The measure passed 29-20, with all Democrats voting against the measure. Three Republicans joined the Democrats, Sens. Kenneth Bogner, R-Miles City; Gregg Hunter, R-Glasgow; and Russ Tempel, R-Chester.
During debate on Thursday, the full Senate contemplated the measure, with both supporters and opponents offering tearful testimony, appeals to religion and worries that the power could be abused.
Sen. Carl Glimm, R-Kila, has carried a similar bill in previous sessions, and pointed to physician assisted aid in dying, often referred to by opponents as “physician suicide,” in other countries, such as Canada and European, calling them “slippery slopes.”
“It will just keep growing and growing,” Glimm said, citing cases where a veteran with post-traumatic stress disorder “was talked into suicide.”
Glimm said he worried that others with physical or intellectual disabilities would be targeted, a concerned shared by other members of his caucus.
“That this is a peaceful way to go out is a fallacy. The drug cocktails they give them contain paralytics and these, without other drugs, will make them suffocate and die,” said Sen. Daniel Emrich, R-Great Falls. “The reason they give them paralytics is to cover up these people would be flailing in place.”
He said the message the Legislature is sending is even more dangerous:
“We’re telling them they’re not worthy to be on this earth. That they should just go away because they’re inconvenient. That they have some disability or ailment or we just don’t want them any more because they’re wasting away.”
The Senate also debated a mixed message about the problem of suicide, a problem that has doggedly plagued Montana, or whether physician-aided death was really similar.
Sen. Emma Kerr-Carpenter, D-Billings, said that the bill wasn’t just for the patients who would utilize a doctor, but also their families, who have a “peaceful” and “structured” way to say goodbye during the process of death.
“They can be surrounded by loved ones or we can leave them suffering in pain without a way out,” Kerr-Carpenter said. “Allow people to use physicians to aid the way they chose to leave this world.”
However, Sen. Sue Vinton, R-Billings, said the image of a peaceful, supportive suicide was a fallacy.
“Many of us have experienced the suicide of a family member or loved one, and there is nothing peaceful or joyful about that,” she said. “What there is is guilt, grief, and it never ends. Don’t believe that every person who chooses suicide is surrounded by loving, joyful people.”
Sen. Bob Phalen, R-Lindsay, questioned how the Montana Legislature could halt lethal injections for death row inmates out of a fear that the drugs would cause suffering or prolong death, but support physician assisted death.
“It is inhumane then, but now it’s OK?” Phalen asked.
“We’re hearing a lot about suicide,” said Sen. Cora Neumann, R-Bozeman, “But this is only for those in the end of life and terminally ill patients, not for people with disabilities. They’re not covered under that.”
Sen. Barry Usher, R-Billings, told of a neighbor who was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer 25 years ago and given a terminal diagnosis. Usher credited the power of prayer to helping overcome the disease, but said he was concerned that doctors are often wrong in terminal diagnosis.
“Let God’s will be God’s will,” Usher said. “He doesn’t give us more than we can handle.”
Another Senator worried about God in a different way during the debate.
Sen. Theresa Manzella, R-Hamilton, said she had concerns about the different variables that come into play during death, including doctors who could make a mistake in the diagnosis, thereby “playing God.”
She said she’s also raised horses and had to euthanize many, but said that when a drug cocktail goes wrong, it makes a horrible and lasting impression.
“At this point in my life, a well placed bullet is more humane than risking something going wrong,” she said.
She said that her religious beliefs and those of others prohibit her support from meddling in the process of dying.“There is suffering in dying, and there’s a lot going on as they’re preparing to leave this life and go into the next, and we don’t want to interfere with that,” Manzella said.
Sen. Daniel Zolnikov, R-Billings, said that he was not opposing either side during the emotional testimony, but urged Senators to look toward developing technology.
“There are new technologies,” he said. “Neurology is helping paraplegics regain function. Technology is learning how to restructure the brain, and that’s going to be a huge leap with Alzheimer’s. There is so much hope in what is coming.”
Throughout the debate on physician aid in dying, there were familiar themes that have been consistent in many legislative debates recently, for example personal freedom, the government’s role in private medical decisions, and talk of slippery slopes.
“In committee, we heard from a lot of people about their travels to the end of life. It is a sacred path and it’s deeply, deeply personal,” said Sen. Andrea Olsen, D-Missoula.
“Everyone has different factors when it’s their turn to go and we, as legislators, must allow the system to work without our interference without saying to them, we can let you do it that way. You have to do it the hard way. We want you to do it my way.
“We need to respect the freedom of the people to work out the best plans they can and please don’t put me in the position of people’s private, very personal and decisions that only affect them.”
The bill will now head to the House.