“People are free to write what they want to on the death certificate.” "We took that provision out." per Shannon E. Sanford, Assistant Professor of Nursing at Gateway Community College

Thank you to all our members who continue to testify at the Health Committee public hearing this evening. Your continued witness is truly inspiring. At this moment, the committee has listened to several hours of testimony and several more are promised. Already, our opponents admit that they were overwhelmed.

Nobody will be surprised that Ms. Gustafson is the State Director of ProChoice Connecticut, which asserts it is “Connecticut’s leading political advocate for reproductive freedom.” And although, abortion is its main gig, it also realizes that they lose support among the majority who oppose abortion for any reason when they are honest, so “reproductive freedom” it is! But, euphemisms abound, because they also support “aid in dying”. If you follow politics in CT or this blog, you know that “aid in dying” is the phrase now even the Connecticut media uses to describe “assisted suicide”. I note this because of Daniela Altimari’s exclusive use of the phrase when covering the press conference of Second Thoughts Connecticut. I know very well that Cathy Ludlum of Second Thoughts used the phrase “assisted suicide” to describe the bill involved. It is her preferred term, and and why wouldn’t it be? “Assisted suicide” is the term used by the state statutes. In fact, a Connecticut Superior Court determined that “Medical Aid in Dying” was just “assisted suicide” by another name. Blick v. Off. of Div. of Crim. 2010 Ct. Sup. 11992 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2010). (Note the important reservations about assisted suicide by the court.) When the Hartford Courant insists in its reporting to use the term “aid in dying” it makes their articles confusing. But, clarity is not the purpose here.

Ms. Gustafson’s Twitter friend “Zacky” seems confused also.

The final tally and analysis of the submitted public hearing testimony will be done (spoiler alert . . we’ll have more Connecticut residents), but an initial review by FIC staff and the reaction of our opponents reveal that we struck a blow today. Some of the public hearing highlights include testimony by Elaine Kolb, Cathy Ludlum, Katie Glenn from AUL, and our own, Peter Wolfgang.

Peter Wolfgang recreating for the Committee, Bill Meyer’s testimony of how he gave his father aid-in-dying.

Did you submit simple written testimony against SB88? It is not too late. Please take time out of your schedule before the end of the week to overwhelm the Public Health Committee with PDF or WORD documents to phtestimony@cga.ct.gov (include your name & “SB88”). These testimonies are important. Unsure what to say? Check out our Assisted Suicide Fact vs Myth sheet.

With regard to falsification of the death certificate permitting someone to omit suicide as the cause of death, we learned today that it is permitted by SB88. Note the use of the word “we” in this testimony. According to Shannon E. Sanford, Assistant Professor of Nursing at Gateway Community College, “People are free to write what they want to on the death certificate.” “We took that provision out.” when referring to a prior year’s provision regarding death certificate falsification. Wow. If you are uncertain why this is a bad thing, please consider this written testimony submitted by the State of Connecticut Division of Criminal Justice.

Please continue to keep the members of the Public Health Committee, the legislature, our opponents and our allies in your thoughtful prayers. Please sign this petition and continue to reach out to your own legislators in every forum and let them know that you oppose SB88. Thank you!

Breaking: please vote “oppose” at this unscientific poll at CT News Junkie. https://bills.ctnewsjunkie.com/bills/2022sb-88