The Star published a commentary by Sylvia Muñoz Schnopp earlier this year that began with the alarmist headline; "Assisted-suicide bill is dangerous." Schnopp's many misconceptions and erroneous assertions are, I suppose, a reflection of her personal beliefs and projections. This kind of hyperbole warrants a reasonable and informed response.

Schnopp seems unaware of the Death with Dignity Act, which has been in effect for years in Oregon. The Oregon Department of Human Services recently released its ninth annual report on the Death with Dignity Act that confirms Oregonians benefit from improved end-of-life care under the statute.

A small number of Oregon's dying patients accessed the law in 2006 — 65 out of approximately 31,000 — while an even smaller group of 46 hastened their deaths by self-administering medications. All but one of the terminally ill residents who chose the option had health insurance and all had access to hospice.

The law that was proposed in California greatly resembled the Oregon law. The statute in Oregon has not produced any of the nightmarish conditions of which Schnopp seems so fearful. No one is attempting to "get rid of old people"; merely, give those who are suffering an option to peacefully end an otherwise hellish decline.

The comparison of end-of-life treatment (when requested) by a physician to the rise of Adolf Hitler is preposterous. It's interesting to me how so many people (mostly conservatives) are so eager to tell others how to live and/or die. And to assert that a drug overdose given to a suffering patient who begs for it is "murder, not compassion" is evidence Schnopp has either no regard for the wishes of a person who may be in the throes of a lingering and painful death, or she adheres to a belief system that precludes any action that may interfere with "God's way."

One thing for sure, Schnopp did not spend years by my mother's bedside, being able to do nothing more for her than blot her tears while she begged to die, suffering unspeakable pain and knowing there was no way out but to endure, until the body finally shut down.

That was 20 years ago. Were my mother alive today, with her condition as it was, I would, as a loving daughter, take her to Oregon, knowing that escape from the protracted death, beyond what normal medical treatment would allow, would be available to her should she want it.

I have no idea whether my mother would have opted to hasten her death, but at least I would know that the option would exist and be hers to exercise. The choice would be hers, not Schnopp's or any person who might choose differently.

The Death with Dignity Act is a civilized vehicle for those who want to avoid imposing lengthy and unnecessary suffering on loved ones or personally experience the indignity of uncontrolled suffering. The law in Oregon has raised awareness among doctors and the public that uncontrolled suffering and loss of autonomy should not be the standard of care for dying patients.

The result has been improved end-of-life care across the board. Oregon has the lowest rate of hospital deaths and the highest rate of in-home deaths in the nation.

If, beyond all the rationale, Schnopp and those who share her views still believe that what was ("God has taken care of the dying since the world began") should always be, or that God rewards those who suffer most, then let them choose whatever path they wish for their journey to the great beyond, but do not impose values that might not be shared on the rest of us.

— Sylvia Lewis Gunning lives in Thousand Oaks.