No one gets out of here alive.
One of the first requirements of good editorial writing is the importance of stating a clear and persuasive opinion.
That’s good advice. Too much hemming and hawing, like too many cooks, spoils the brew.
But there are situations where the pros and cons so conflict that it’s well nigh impossible to embrace a firm opinion.
That’s the case with Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s recent decision to sign assisted-suicide legislation that allows the terminally ill to end their lives. In doing so, Illinois becomes the 12th state to allow assisted suicide.
Pritzker said he was taken by surprise when the legislature passed this law and sent it to his desk. In springing this controversial proposal on the governor and the public, legislators once again embraced the dishonorable practice of legislating by surprise.
After conducting a review of the issue, Pritzker decided to sign the bill. No one should envy his position as the “decider” on such an emotional issue.
Given the nature of the issue, it’s no surprise that some terminally ill and their advocates believe assisted suicide is the least worst of terrible options.
The law allows the terminally ill to request and self-administer a prescription that would end their lives, presumably bringing a quick, painless end to an unbearable medical situation.
But then what? Other jurisdictions that have embraced assisted suicide have expanded and simplified the process. News reports indicate that in Canada, one in 20 deaths in 2023 was the result of assisted suicide.
That’s 5 percent of the nation’s annual death rate, hardly the rare situation Illinois advocates describe.
And what of the reasons for assisted suicide? Chicago Cardinal Blaze Cupich suggested pain relief is a better, far more palatable solution. Others have argued that those who are disabled, depressed or afraid of becoming a family burden, financial or otherwise, might seek to go down this path.
There also is the not-so-small matter of potential financial exploitation of those who are seriously ill. That’s already a common problem, one that could become worse with this new life-ending option.
The arguments advocates made on behalf of the legislation Pritzker signed sound eminently reasonable — no way out, peaceful and painless conclusion and an end to everyone’s suffering.
But now that the camel’s nose is firmly under the tent, it’s fair to ask what’s next. Why? Zealots who push proposals like this almost always have proposals up their sleeves that expand upon a change of this nature.
There is no question that assisted suicide is an issue that has growing strength. It’s like marijuana legalization in that it’s akin to a snowball rolling down a steep hill, gathering size and momentum with every inch.
That’s why it’s a fair bet that other states will follow Illinois’ example.
Decades ago, Ohio Dr. Jack Kevorkian made it his mission to end the suffering of suffering patients. He was tried — and acquitted — three times for murder before being convicted and sentenced to prison.
That showed jurors have an innate sympathy for arguments on behalf of assisted suicide but not unanimity of opinion.
The legislature and Pritzker have spoken. Now Illinoisans must pay close attention to what happens next in this grim social experiment.
