Salem, Ore. — A new bill in the Oregon Legislature is reigniting debate over the state’s long-standing “Death with Dignity Act.” Senate Bill 1003, introduced by the Senate Judiciary Committee, proposes to reduce the mandatory waiting period for terminally ill patients seeking physician-assisted death from 15 days to seven. Supporters argue the change would ease the burden on dying patients, while opponents fear it could rush vulnerable individuals into irreversible decisions.
Oregon is one of 11 states, along with Washington, D.C., that allows terminally ill adults with a prognosis of six months or less to request a lethal dose of medication. The state has long required two oral requests to be made to a physician, with a minimum 15-day interval between them. SB 1003 seeks to shorten that interval, citing the challenges faced by those with rapidly deteriorating health.
The proposed legislation would also modernize the process by permitting electronic transmission of prescriptions and documentation. Additionally, it would require healthcare facilities and hospices to publicly disclose their policies on physician-assisted death both before admitting patients and on their websites. Another notable change would broaden prescribing authority by replacing the terms “attending physician” and “consulting physician” with “attending practitioner” and “consulting practitioner,” though the law would still require these practitioners to be licensed physicians in Oregon.
The bill received a public hearing Monday before the Senate Committee on Rules, where it was met with substantial opposition. Out of 441 letters submitted to the committee, 429 were in opposition and just 12 supported the proposal. Mental health professionals, Christian medical organizations, and other critics warned that the shortened waiting period could compromise patient safety and reduce time for individuals to process their diagnoses or explore alternative treatments.
“This creates a culture of death over that of life,” said Rep. E. Werner Reschke, R-Malin, during the hearing.
Opponents also raised concerns about mental health screening and the possibility that patients may feel pressure to end their lives prematurely, particularly if facing emotional distress or lack of access to comprehensive palliative care.
However, proponents of the bill emphasized the importance of autonomy and easing bureaucratic hurdles for those already facing end-of-life suffering. Thomas Ngo, a Portland resident, shared how his mother peacefully ended her life through Oregon’s Death with Dignity Act after a terminal cancer diagnosis. He said the current system worked for his mother, but could be unnecessarily burdensome for others in more advanced stages of illness.
Ngo also shared that his father’s partner, who suffered from the same condition, was unable to access physician-assisted death due to being under the care of a religiously affiliated hospital that declined participation. Under current law, Oregon healthcare providers can opt out of the program.
The Death with Dignity Act, initially passed through a 1994 citizens’ initiative with 51% of the vote, has remained a contentious issue for decades. After a three-year legal delay, the law took effect in 1997, and a subsequent repeal effort failed the same year.
According to the Oregon Health Authority, 607 individuals received prescriptions for life-ending medication in 2024. Most were over the age of 65, white, and had cancer, neurological diseases, or heart disease as their primary diagnoses.
The next step for SB 1003 is a scheduled work session in the Senate Committee on Rules. Lawmakers will decide whether to advance the bill to the Senate floor or hold it, effectively shelving it for the remainder of the legislative session.
As the debate continues, the bill underscores Oregon’s ongoing role at the forefront of end-of-life policy — and the delicate balance between individual choice and societal safeguards.
