US EditionCritic of Assisted Suicide Law Could Have More Constructive Focus
- Jacob Sandoval, who leads the California chapter of LULAC, expressed his opposition in an editorial dated May 18 to the proposal that would permanently extend the End of Life Option Act.
- Sandoval’s opposition followed concerns about hospice fraud, low Medi-Cal reimbursements, and incomplete data reporting, highlighting systemic issues in California’s healthcare.
- Data from state health reports since 2016 indicate that individuals who have accessed the End of Life Option Act tend to be predominantly wealthy, well-educated, and White—a detail that Sandoval acknowledges but unexpectedly challenges.
- The editorial questions whether Sandoval wants more low-income and people of color to use the law amid dangers like cost-driven denials, structural discrimination, and predatory conduct in healthcare.
- The article suggests Sandoval could better serve by advocating to reduce the cited healthcare dangers rather than opposing a law that allows choice for people who are dying.
19 Articles
19 Articles
Critic of assisted suicide law could have more constructive focus
Re “A right to die: Irresponsible policy lacks much needed oversight” (May 18): California League of United Latin American Citizens director Jacob Sandoval’s opposition to the bill making the End of Life Option Act permanent was surprising. Sandoval gripes off-target against the state’s high rate of hospice fraud, poor Medi-Cal reimbursement rates, incomplete data reporting and reports that never see the light of day. However, the California De…
On Saturday, 24 May, while Members of Parliament concluded their consideration of the bill establishing a right to help die, Interior Minister Bruno Retailleau criticized the introduction of an offence to interfere with this right.
In the debate on the end of life, MEPs have for the moment favoured assisted suicide rather than euthanasia, which would imply an active gesture by the doctor, in order to provide a profession which they imagine viscerally opposed to this legalization. In reality, opinions are much more nuanced.
On Saturday, 24 May, MEPs voted for the creation of an offence to obstruct access to help to die. It is similar to the offence of obstructing voluntary interruptions of pregnancy (IVG).
MEPs have increased the penalty to layer it over the penalty for the offence of obstructing the voluntary termination of pregnancy.
The Office condemns any statement that suggests that medical assistance in dying could be considered for anyone without free and informed consent, whether or not it is a person with a disability and who is not...
Coverage Details
Bias Distribution
- 60% of the sources lean Left
To view factuality data please Upgrade to Premium
Ownership
To view ownership data please Upgrade to Vantage
