Indiana 2024 Regular Session

Indiana Senate Bill SCR0017 Compare Versions

Version 1 (Old)

Version 2 (New)

Old	New		Differences
1		-	~~March 1, 2024~~
	1	+	Introduced Version
2	2		SENATE CONCURRENT
3	3		RESOLUTION No. 17
4		-	DIGEST OF RESOLUTION
	4	+	DIGEST OF INTRODUCED RESOLUTION
5	5		A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION opposing and condemning
6	6		assisted suicide.
7	7		Johnson T
8	8		February 1, 2024, read first time and referred to Committee on Health and Provider
9	9		Services.
10		-	February 29, 2024, reported favorably — Do Pass.
11		-	SC 17—RC 1502/DI SM March 1, 2024
	10	+	2024 SC 17—RC 1502/DI SM Introduced
12	11		Second Regular Session 123rd General Assembly (2024)
13	12		SENATE CONCURRENT
14	13		RESOLUTION No. 17
15	14		1 A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION opposing and
16	15		2 condemning assisted suicide.
17	16		3 Whereas, The State of Indiana has an unqualified interest
18	17		4 in the preservation of human life and the State's prohibition on
19	18		5 assisting suicide in IC 35-42-1-2.5 both reflects and advances
20	19		6 its commitment to the State's interest;
21	20		7 Whereas, Neither the United States Constitution nor the
22	21		8 Constitution of the State of Indiana contain a right to assisted
23	22		9 suicide and neither include a right for one individual to
24	23		10 authorize another to end their life in violation of federal or
25	24		11 state criminal laws;
26	25		12 Whereas, Suicide is not a typical reaction to an acute
27	26		13 problem or life circumstance, and many individuals who
28	27		14 contemplate suicide, including the terminally ill, suffer from
29	28		15 treatable mental disorders, most commonly clinical depression,
30	29		16 which frequently goes undiagnosed and untreated by
31	30		17 physicians;
32	31		18 Whereas, In Oregon,46 percent of patients seeking assisted
33	32		19 suicide changed their minds when their physicians intervened
34	33		20 and appropriately addressed suicidal ideations by treating their
35	34		21 pain, depression, or other medical problems;
36	35		22 Whereas, Palliative care continues to improve and altering
37	36		23 the treatment focus to relieving pain and allows a person to die
38	37		24 naturally, comfortably, and in a dignified manner without a
39	38		25 change in the law;
40		-	SC 17—RC 1502/DI SM 2
	39	+	2024 SC 17—RC 1502/DI SM 2
41	40		1 Whereas, Experiences in Oregon and the Netherlands
42	41		2 explicitly demonstrate that palliative care options deteriorate
43	42		3 with the legalization of physician-assisted suicide;
44	43		4 Whereas, A physician's recommendation for assisted
45	44		5 suicide relies on the physician's judgment — to include negative
46	45		6 perceptions — that a patient's life is not worth living,
47	46		7 ultimately contributing to the use of "futility care" protocols
48	47		8 and euthanasia;
49	48		9 Whereas, The legalization of assisted suicide sends a
50	49		10 message that suicide is a socially acceptable response to aging,
51	50		11 terminal illnesses, disabilities, and depression and subsequently
52	51		12 imposes a "duty to die";
53	52		13 Whereas, The medical profession as a whole opposes
54	53		14 physician-assisted suicide because it is contrary to the medical
55	54		15 profession's duty to the Hippocratic Oath and their role as
56	55		16 healer, and undermines the physician-patient relationship;
57	56		17 Whereas, Assisted suicide is significantly less expensive
58	57		18 than other care options and Oregon's experience demonstrates
59	58		19 that cost constraints can create financial incentives to limit
60	59		20 care and offer assisted suicide;
61	60		21 Whereas, As evidenced in Oregon, the private nature of
62	61		22 end-of-life decisions makes it virtually impossible to police a
63	62		23 physician's behavior to prevent abuses, making any number of
64	63		24 safeguards insufficient;
65	64		25 Whereas, Assisted suicide is a direct threat to human
66	65		26 dignity, patient rights, and the disabled when the medical goal
67	66		27 must be to eliminate suffering rather than the person who
68	67		28 suffers;
69	68		29 Whereas, Patients should be allowed to die naturally
70	69		30 through the use of ordinary treatment to sustain needs, increase
71	70		31 comfort, and place the focus from curing back to caring rather
72	71		32 than obligate the use of extraordinary medical treatment that
73		-	SC 17—RC 1502/DI SM 3
	72	+	2024 SC 17—RC 1502/DI SM 3
74	73		1 would prolong their dying; and
75	74		2 Whereas, A prohibition on assisted suicide, specifically
76	75		3 physician-assisted suicide, is the only way to protect vulnerable
77	76		4 citizens from coerced suicide and euthanasia: Therefore,
78	77		5 Be it resolved by the Senate of the General Assembly
79	78		6 of the State of Indiana, the House of Representatives
80	79		7 concurring:
81	80		8 SECTION 1. That the Indiana General Assembly, in its
82	81		9 unqualified interest in the preservation of human life, strongly
83	82		10 opposes and condemns physician-assisted suicide.
84	83		11 SECTION 2. That the Indiana General Assembly strongly
85	84		12 opposes physician-assisted suicide because anything less than
86	85		13 a prohibition leads to foreseeable abuses and eventually to
87	86		14 euthanasia by devaluing human life, particularly the lives of the
88	87		15 terminally ill, elderly, disabled, and depressed, whose lives are
89	88		16 of no less value or quality than any other citizen of this State.
90	89		17 SECTION 3. That the Indiana General Assembly strongly
91	90		18 opposes physician-assisted suicide even for terminally ill,
92	91		19 mentally competent adults because assisted suicide eviscerates
93	92		20 efforts to prevent the self-destructive act of suicide and hinders
94	93		21 progress in effective physician interventions, including
95	94		22 diagnosing and treating depression, managing pain, and
96	95		23 providing palliative and hospice care.
97	96		24 SECTION 4. That the Indiana General Assembly strongly
98	97		25 opposes physician-assisted suicide because assisted suicide
99	98		26 undermines the integrity and ethics of the medical profession,
100	99		27 subverts a physician's role as healer, and compromises the
101	100		28 physician-patient relationship.
102	101		29 SECTION 5. The Secretary of the Senate is hereby directed
103	102		30 to transmit copies of this Resolution to Governor Eric
104	103		31 Holcomb, the Commissioner of the Indiana Department of
105	104		32 Health, and the Indiana State Medical Association.
106		-	SC 17—RC 1502/DI SM 4
107		-	COMMITTEE REPORT
108		-	Madam President: The Senate Committee on Health and Provider
109		-	Services, to which was referred Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 17,
110		-	has had the same under consideration and begs leave to report the same
111		-	back to the Senate with the recommendation that said resolution DO
112		-	PASS.
113		-	(Reference is to SC 17 as introduced.)
114		-
115		-	CHARBONNEAU, Chairperson
116		-	Committee Vote: Yeas 9, Nays 2
117		-	SC 17—RC 1502/DI SM
	105	+	2024 SC 17—RC 1502/DI SM