Thomas Herlihy III of Wilmington is a retired lawyer, who practiced in Delaware for 59 years. He dedicated his career’s final 25 years to elder law.
As we approach a decade since medical aid-in-dying legislation was first introduced in Delaware, residents and lawmakers alike should be well versed on how this established end-of-life health care option works in the United States. Sadly, we are still hearing arguments based on fear (at best) and lies (at worst), perpetuated in legislative hearings.
Forty-two years ago, I testified before the Delaware House of Representatives — based on my many years of practice in elder law — advocating for a bill to authorize living wills. Opponents of that law made the same arguments that we hear today: They said living wills would violate their religious beliefs or put people who are disabled at risk. We have had 42 years to prove that those arguments were, and are, unfounded. Further, Delaware’s aid-in-dying bill (House Bill 140) includes even more safeguards than the living-will law did.
Here are the facts: Medical aid in dying, authorized in 10 states and Washington, D.C., allows an adult with a terminal illness and a prognosis of six months or less to live — certified by two health care providers — to request, obtain and self-ingest medication they can choose to take to gently end his/her life on his/her own terms. Delaware’s proposed law, as well as all U.S. medical aid-in-dying laws, requires a person to have the mental capacity to make his/her own health care decisions. Age or disability alone do not qualify somebody for this option, and no patient, doctor or medical institution is required to participate in or provide medical aid in dying. Abuse and coercion are strictly prohibited.
Though the opposition may claim differently, or cite laws in other countries, none of the medical aid-in-dying laws in the U.S. has amended any of these core safeguards; there is no “slippery slope.” This is because we have nearly 30 years of data showing that the laws are well crafted to provide people with terminal illnesses the agency to determine their own end-of-life journeys, while also protecting patients. These laws work well.
My support for this compassionate option doesn’t only stem from my years of experience in elder law or my advocacy to authorize living wills and medical aid in dying in Delaware — it also comes from personal experience. My wife, Constance Herlihy, died with a terminal disease. She told me she wanted a gentle exit, but she was held prisoner in her own body for years, suffering while waiting to die, despite her use of hospice and palliative care. People who are dying, like Constance was, shouldn’t be denied a full range of end-of-life health care options because Delaware lawmakers want to impose their personal feelings on their constituents.
I implore lawmakers who don’t support medical aid in dying because of fear or misunderstanding to look at the facts. I encourage the Delaware legislature to honor the wishes of nearly 3 in 4 Delaware voters and physicians who support this option. I urge them to pass HB 140 in 2025.
Reader reactions, pro or con, are welcomed at civiltalk@iniusa.org.
