Committee Summary for House Judiciary (01/29/2025)

Bill/Time	Type	Title	Sponsor
HB199 00:04:35.880 - 8:33:31 AM	Public Hearing	extending the statute of limitation on civil actions relative to damage caused by per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).	Vail, Suzanne(D)[CT]2025
HB268 00:47:16.000 - 9:16:12 AM	Public Hearing	relative to hearings before the board of tax and land appeals.	Lynn, Bob(R)[B]2025
HB337 01:06:17.520 - 9:35:13 AM	Public Hearing	relative to the reporting requirements of the judicial council.	Weyler, Kenneth(R)[A-]2025
HB369 01:37:12.239 - 10:06:08 AM	Public Hearing	(New Title) relative to misdemeanor sexual assault prosecutions and relative to the duty to report for sexual offenders and offenders against children.	Potenza, Kelley(R)[A]2025
HB337 01:12:01.040 - 9:40:57 AM	Executive Session	relative to the reporting requirements of the judicial council.	Weyler, Kenneth(R)[A-]2025
Unclear 01:20:05.480 - 9:49:01 AM	General Working Session	Unclear
HB369 01:44:28.880 - 10:13:24 AM	Public Hearing	(New Title) relative to misdemeanor sexual assault prosecutions and relative to the duty to report for sexual offenders and offenders against children.	Potenza, Kelley(R)[A]2025
HB254 03:36:45.160 - 12:05:41 PM	Public Hearing	relative to options for end of life care.	Lynn, Bob(R)[B]2025

HB199: Representative Suzanne Vale, Hillsboro County 6, Nashua Support00:04:35.880 - 8:33:31 AM; Representative Vale presented House Bill 199, which seeks to extend the statute of limitations for civil actions related to damages caused by peroral alcohol and polyal alcohol substances (PFAS) from 6 years to 20 years. She highlighted the ongoing environmental disaster in Southern New Hampshire, specifically mentioning Merrimack, and the difficulties posed by the current six-year limit for calculating damages such as remediation, medical monitoring, and property loss. Vale discussed the persistent and bioaccumulative nature of PFAS chemicals, their uses, and the health issues they cause, including fetal development issues, cancer, and kidney disease. She noted the contamination from the St. Gobain Performance Plastics plant in Merrimack and other sources, emphasizing the challenges faced by affected communities and the need for a longer statute of limitations to fully assess and address the scope of harm.
HB199: Representative Wendy Thomas, Merrimack Support00:16:08.720 - 8:45:04 AM; Representative Thomas, representing the contaminated town of Merrimack, supported the bill by discussing the severe health impacts of PFAS, including carcinogenic properties and hormone disruption. She shared personal experiences and statistics from her town, including a high rate of learning disabilities among children and health issues like infertility and cancer among residents exposed to contaminated water. Thomas emphasized the ongoing nature of the contamination and the need for a 20-year statute of limitations to address the long-term effects of PFAS exposure.
HB199: Mike Wims, Director of the Waste Management Division, New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services Information Only00:32:55.639 - 9:01:51 AM; Mike Wims provided information about the Department of Environmental Services' efforts to address PFAS contamination in Southern New Hampshire. He noted that significant releases were first discovered in 2016, leading to extensive sampling efforts that identified thousands of affected drinking water wells. Wims emphasized the agency's ongoing work to ensure access to clean water and the dedication of staff to evaluating PFAS contamination sites.
HB199: N. Gra, Business and Industry Association Oppose00:34:27.359 - 9:03:23 AM; N. Gra from the Business and Industry Association opposed the legislation, arguing that extending the statute of limitations to 20 years is unnecessary. He explained that the current six-year limit allows for a clearer connection between harm and cause, citing concerns about evidence becoming stale, memories fading, and the difficulty in proving causality as time passes. Gra used hypothetical scenarios to illustrate how intervening events could complicate establishing a causal relationship in legal proceedings.
HB268: Representative Lynn Support00:47:16.000 - 9:16:12 AM; Representative Lynn introduced House Bill 268 FN, which aims to confirm that the Board of Tax and Land Appeals (BTLA) can hold their hearings in their existing hearing room in Concord. He explained that this practice is already common and the bill would clarify and authorize this, potentially preventing any future legal challenges regarding venue. Lynn mentioned that the bill was requested by Miss LeBron, suggesting it's a practical solution without opposition.
HB268: Eric Wind, Board of Tax and Land Appeals Support00:50:49.520 - 9:19:45 AM; Eric Wind, a member of the Board of Tax and Land Appeals, spoke in support of HB268 FN, highlighting the challenges faced with the current imminent domain procedures act. He explained that the requirement to hold hearings in the county where the taking occurs is problematic due to the lack of available space in county courthouses. Wind proposed that using existing hearing rooms and remote technologies would be more cost-effective and efficient. He also suggested amending the bill's effective date to 60 days after passage instead of January 1, 2026, to reflect it as an agency request.
HB268: Michelle LeBrun, Chair of the Board of Tax and Land Appeals Support00:56:51.640 - 9:25:47 AM; Michelle LeBrun, the Chair of the Board of Tax and Land Appeals, supported HB268 FN by reinforcing the issues with finding suitable locations for hearings. She mentioned that if parties request a hearing in a specific county but no location is available, the board would prefer to use virtual methods. LeBrun also noted that the board would still conduct a view of the property upon request, even if the hearing is not held in the county.
HB337: Jay Bucky, Executive Director of the Judicial Council Information Only01:06:17.520 - 9:35:13 AM; Jay Bucky, the Executive Director of the Judicial Council, did not take a position on HB337 but was available to answer questions. He pointed out an ambiguity in the bill regarding disclosure requirements for all members of the Judicial Council, suggesting that simplifying the language to include all members without specific enumeration would be clearer. Bucky also confirmed that members of the Judicial Council, other than judges and legislators, currently have to file disclosures, and he clarified the composition of the Judicial Council as defined by statute.
HB369: Representative Kelly Penzien, Strafford District 19 Support01:37:12.239 - 10:06:08 AM; Representative Kelly Penzien spoke in support of HB369, emphasizing its personal significance as it affects her family. She discussed the current judicial process's drawbacks, particularly the revictimization of victims in sexual assault cases due to multiple court proceedings. Penzien explained that her daughter's case, which has not yet had an initial hearing, illustrates the long delays and the need for the bill to streamline the process. She stressed that the bill would not affect the due process of the accused but would prevent victims from having to go through the process twice.
HB369: Pamela Kyllie, Public Policy Specialist at the Coalition against Domestic and Sexual Violence Support01:40:54.599 - 10:09:50 AM; Pamela Kyllie supported HB369, highlighting its importance in streamlining the judicial process for victims of sexual assault, especially minors. She noted that the current system allows offenders to delay justice, which further traumatizes victims. Kyllie emphasized the long-term impact of trauma on child survivors, who often come forward much later in life. She argued that the bill would help prevent the revictimization of these survivors by avoiding multiple court proceedings and urged the committee to support the legislation.
HB337: Committee Members Support01:12:01.040 - 9:40:57 AM; The committee discussed HB337 and decided to move forward with an 'ought to pass' (OTP) recommendation. There was some discussion about potential amendments to clarify disclosure requirements for members of the Judicial Council, but ultimately, the bill was passed as is, with the understanding that it would go on the consent calendar. Representative Burgeron was tasked with writing the report, with assistance promised from the chair and other members.
Unclear: Committee Members Information Only01:20:05.480 - 9:49:01 AM; The committee discussed scheduling additional hearings for seven bills that came in after the initial February schedule. They considered several dates, including February 17th (President's Day), February 26th, and February 27th, but faced issues with availability and room bookings. Eventually, they decided to schedule the hearings for February 3rd, with the understanding that this would be a busy day but necessary to accommodate all bills. There was some discussion about splitting the hearings over two days, but it was decided to proceed with a single day.
HB369: Eva, Survivor of sexual assault Support01:44:28.880 - 10:13:24 AM; Eva shared her personal experience of being a survivor of sexual assault at the age of 14, emphasizing the trauma and difficulty she faced not only from the assault itself but also from the subsequent legal process. She was victimized by her abuser and further by the system, which she felt failed her at every step, including guidance counselors, school resource officers, and the police department. She described the emotional toll, including depression, suicidal thoughts, and difficulty forming new relationships. Eva supports HB 369 because it aims to simplify the legal process for survivors, reducing the trauma of having to testify multiple times. She urged the legislators to consider the impact on survivors and to make changes to support them.
HB369: Steven Endris, Assistant County Attorney, Merrimack County Attorney's Office Support01:47:46.040 - 10:16:42 AM; Steven Endris, an experienced prosecutor, supports HB 369, which aims to address the issue of victims having to testify multiple times in misdemeanor sexual assault cases. He explained the current legal process where a conviction in Circuit Court can be appealed for a denovo jury trial in Superior Court, requiring victims to testify twice. The bill would allow defendants to elect a jury trial in Superior Court at the outset, potentially sparing victims the trauma of multiple testimonies. He mentioned a case where they used RSA 592-A1 to bring a case directly to Superior Court to avoid re-traumatizing a vulnerable victim. Endris suggested a small amendment to clarify the age criteria in the bill to prevent ambiguity.
HB369: Parent of a sexual assault survivor Support02:08:25.400 - 10:37:21 AM; The parent of a sexual assault survivor spoke about their daughter's case, which occurred when she was 14, but the perpetrator was not arrested until she was 16. They emphasized the ongoing trauma and the lengthy legal process their family endured, which could take years to resolve. They supported HB 369, believing it could help prevent other families from experiencing similar difficulties. The parent mentioned the bill's current limitations, as it would not apply to their daughter's case if it took longer to reach trial due to her age at the time of prosecution commencement, and expressed openness to amendments that might broaden its application.
HB369: Eva, Survivor of sexual assault Support02:14:36.480 - 10:43:32 AM; Eva returned to reiterate her support for HB 369, emphasizing the traumatic nature of the legal process for survivors. She highlighted the importance of not having to relive the incident repeatedly in court, which can be shaming and embarrassing. She urged the committee to pass the bill to reduce the trauma experienced by victims of sexual assault.
HB369: Mark Pearson, Chair of the Children and Family Law Committee Support02:16:25.360 - 10:45:21 AM; Mark Pearson, Chair of the Children and Family Law Committee, spoke in support of the bill aimed at addressing the restoration of competency for those accused of crimes. He highlighted the constitutional right for individuals to assist in their own defense and the lack of a formal program in New Hampshire to help people come to competency. He mentioned the low success rate in New Hampshire compared to other states and the formation of a bipartisan committee to study the issue. Pearson stressed the importance of the program for providing closure to both victims and the accused, potentially leading to more favorable outcomes for the accused. He detailed the committee's findings, including the need for a forensic liaison and the suggestion that the Department of Health and Human Services should oversee the program rather than the judicial branch. He also discussed the amendment process, which was a collaborative effort among various stakeholders and emphasized its significance despite the lack of a fiscal note at the time.
HB369: Steven Andis, Assistant County Attorney at the Merrimack County Attorney's Office Support02:25:04.760 - 10:54:00 AM; Steven Andis, an Assistant County Attorney from Merrimack County, supported the bill, echoing the sentiment that competency restoration is a serious issue in New Hampshire. He noted the absence of a system for restoration and emphasized the necessity for action.
HB369: Holly Stevens, Director of Public Policy at NAMI New Hampshire Support02:26:00.880 - 10:54:56 AM; Holly Stevens, representing NAMI New Hampshire, expressed support for both the bill and its amendment. She highlighted the lack of a formal competency restoration program in New Hampshire and the lower rate of restored competency compared to the national average. Stevens discussed the implications of not restoring competency within a year, including the denial of closure to victims and the accused's right to defend themselves. She emphasized the missed opportunity for treatment within the justice system and the role of a forensic liaison program, which would be overseen by the Department of Health and Human Services, in addressing this issue.
HB369: Cynthia Babonis, Legislative Liaison and Chief Community Integration Officer for New Hampshire Hospital, Department of Health and Human Services Information Only02:33:02.840 - 11:01:58 AM; Cynthia Babonis from the New Hampshire Hospital and Department of Health and Human Services provided information on the bill. She acknowledged the importance of the legislation and the department's commitment to minimizing the justice system's response to people with mental illness. Babonis noted the department's participation in the study committee and emphasized the need for collaboration and understanding of resources to advance the proposed model.
HB369: Aon Krian, General Counsel for the Judicial Branch Support02:34:41.200 - 11:03:37 AM; Aon Krian, representing the Judicial Branch, praised the collaborative effort led by Chairman Pearson and supported the bill. He noted the lack of a formalized competency restoration process in New Hampshire and the challenges faced by the governor's subcommittee. Krian highlighted the potential of the proposed pilot program as a path forward and commended the Department of Health and Human Services for their serious approach to assuming more responsibility in this area.
HB369: Janelle Llant, Prospective Graduate Student in Forensic Psychology Support02:37:22.000 - 11:06:18 AM; Janelle Llant, a prospective graduate student in forensic psychology with experience at the AA Psychiatric Institute, supported the bill. She shared insights from Colorado's successful competency restoration efforts, emphasizing the importance of navigators or forensic liaisons in addressing underlying needs such as housing, employment, substance use, and mental health.
HB254: Bob Lyn, Representative from Windham Support03:36:45.160 - 12:05:41 PM; Representative Bob Lyn, the prime sponsor of House Bill 254, introduced the bill as the End of Life Freedom Act. He emphasized the bill's focus on providing people at the end of their life with the freedom to end their life with dignity, avoiding prolonged suffering. He noted that the bill passed the House the previous year on a bipartisan basis, though it faced opposition as well. Lyn highlighted the bill's provisions, including the requirement that individuals must be within six months of death or in medically certified hospice to be eligible. He stressed the protective measures in the bill, such as the need for two independent doctors to certify competency and the presence of mental health professional referrals if necessary. He shared personal reflections on his age and the potential future need for such an option, asserting the importance of personal choice in end-of-life decisions. He addressed concerns about abuse by pointing out the strong procedures and criminal penalties in the bill to prevent such issues. Additionally, he responded to various questions about the bill's details, including qualifications of healthcare professionals, the definition of healthcare entities, and the attribution of cause of death in certain scenarios. He also touched on the absence of a residency requirement and the potential impact on state statistics.
HB254: Representative Woodcock Support04:02:47.439 - 12:31:43 PM; Representative Woodcock expressed strong support for the Medical Aid in Dying bill, emphasizing it as a matter of personal choice for competent adults. He shared personal stories to illustrate the need for such legislation, including the case of his brother who suffered from heart disease and wished for the option to end his life with dignity. Woodcock argued that the bill provides a necessary freedom for those at the end of life, allowing them to make their own decisions.
HB254: Wayne Burton, Representative from Durham Support04:07:03.680 - 12:35:59 PM; Representative Wayne Burton voiced his strong support for House Bill 254, sharing a personal story of his friend who utilized Maine's Death with Dignity law. He described his friend's battle with cancer caused by Agent Orange exposure during the Vietnam War and the pain and suffering he endured. Burton read from an op-ed piece he wrote, arguing that individuals in such situations should have the right to choose to end their lives with dignity. He criticized opposition to the bill, suggesting they should consider the experiences of those directly affected by terminal illnesses.
HB254: Hope Damon, State Representative from Sullivan District 8 Support04:10:49.840 - 12:39:45 PM; Representative Hope Damon spoke in favor of HB254, sharing a personal story about a friend named Michael who chose to end his life in Switzerland due to his terminal illness. She emphasized the importance of giving individuals the choice to end their life on their own terms, highlighting the emotional and financial burden of traveling abroad for such an option. She expressed hope that everyone could have the opportunity to make this choice without needing significant resources.
HB254: Samuel Stafford from Pelham, New Hampshire Oppose04:14:12.199 - 12:43:08 PM; Samuel Stafford, a resident of Pelham, shared his personal struggle with Duchenne muscular dystrophy and a subsequent battle with Bartonella, a brain bacteria causing severe psychiatric issues. He described how, during his darkest times, assisted suicide seemed like a viable option but stressed the importance of the support he received from his mother, which helped him recover and lead a fulfilling life. He opposed HB254, arguing that it could be misused by medical and insurance entities to prematurely end lives like his, advocating for compassionate care over assisted suicide.
HB254: Benjamin Safford from Pelham, New Hampshire Oppose04:17:06.680 - 12:46:02 PM; Benjamin Safford, also from Pelham, strongly opposed HB254, describing it as promoting an ableist worldview detrimental to the disability community. He argued that the bill discourages proper medical treatment and dignity for people with disabilities, pointing out that it could lead to reduced medical services and reinforce harmful societal attitudes towards disabilities. He urged the committee to consider the broader implications of such legislation on the lives of those with disabilities.
HB254: Lydia Safford (testimony read by her mother) Oppose04:19:23.279 - 12:48:19 PM; Lydia Safford, unable to attend in person due to work in the disability community, had her testimony read by her mother. She spoke against HB254, emphasizing her personal struggles with depression and anxiety and the value she finds in life despite these challenges. She highlighted the potential dangers of the bill for those with mental health issues and disabilities, suggesting it could reinforce negative views about the worth of disabled lives. She strongly opposed the bill, calling for a focus on life's value over ending it.
HB254: Mary Fahey representing Cornerstone Oppose04:23:01.399 - 12:51:57 PM; Mary Fahey, representing Cornerstone and speaking as someone with multiple incurable diseases and a survivor of a teen suicide attempt, opposed HB254. She shared her personal experience of how knowledge of similar legislation in other countries nearly led her to another suicide attempt. She argued that the bill normalizes suicide as a solution to suffering, which could be harmful to young people and those with illnesses. She emphasized the need for suicide prevention over promotion and highlighted the inherent value of all lives, regardless of illness or suffering.
HB254: Laura Alasam, Londonderry Oppose04:26:23.199 - 12:55:19 PM; Laura Alasam urged the committee to vote against HB254, arguing that the bill does not address the prevention of suicide but rather legitimizes state-assisted taking of life. She highlighted the slippery slope observed in Canada with Medical Aid in Dying (MAID) growing at a 30% annual rate since its legalization in 2016. She mentioned that in Oregon, reasons for choosing assisted death are not primarily pain-related, according to a recent NIH study. She emphasized the importance of focusing on palliative care, mental health care, and support for those contemplating suicide.
HB254: Paige Bman, Hillsboro 3, Nashua Ward 4 Support04:28:26.040 - 12:57:22 PM; Paige Bman, a registered nurse specializing in mental health and health equity, supported HB254 as a body autonomy bill. She argued that denying individuals the right to make decisions about their own bodies contradicts medical practice norms. She debunked the misconception that discussing suicide increases its incidence, stating that direct conversations about suicidal ideation do not raise the risk. She stressed the importance of not withholding care due to its unequal impact on different groups and advocated for improving mental health and health equity without removing specific end-of-life options.
HB254: Rebecca Brown, Sugar Hill Support04:31:29.479 - 1:00:25 PM; Rebecca Brown, from the New Hampshire Alliance for End of Life Options, supported HB254, sharing her personal story of her husband's suicide due to terminal illness. She emphasized that the bill is not about suicide prevention but could prevent violent deaths and alleviate suffering for terminally ill individuals. She provided resources in the committee's folder, including stories from New Hampshire residents, fact sheets on medical aid in dying, and research showing no impact on suicide rates in states with such laws. She hoped for compassion and freedom in the decision-making process for end-of-life care.
HB254: Kathy Baker Oppose04:37:14.759 - 1:06:10 PM; Kathy Baker opposed HB254, arguing that despite good intentions, the bill would lead to evil by making individuals accessories to suicide, including doctors, mental health professionals, and legislators. She criticized the bill for medicalizing death and equating killing with care, which she believes devalues the lives of the ill and disabled. She cited examples from Washington state and Canada where financial considerations led to assisted suicides, suggesting that such laws could be marketed as a cheaper option than medical care.
HB254: Gary York, Hopkinton Support04:41:00.600 - 1:09:56 PM; Gary York, a retired physician and end-of-life advocate, supported HB254, emphasizing the need to weigh the relevance of testimonies to the specifics of the bill. He highlighted the lack of evidence of abuse in states where similar acts have been implemented and stressed the importance of medical freedom, aligning with New Hampshire's motto, 'Live Free or Die.' He pointed out the small number of people likely to use such legislation and reiterated that the act is about individual choice and freedom, not coercion.
HB254: Cara Phillips, Providence, Rhode Island Support04:45:02.878 - 1:13:58 PM; Cara Phillips, a passionate advocate for medical aid in dying, supported HB254 by sharing her traumatic experience of her mother's suicide due to terminal illness. She argued that medical aid in dying could prevent such desperate actions and alleviate suffering for terminally ill individuals. She is pursuing a Master of Public Health and aims to contribute to research on the topic, emphasizing that such legislation prevents suffering and trauma for both patients and their loved ones.
HB254: Brenda Maray, Durham Support04:48:31.878 - 1:17:27 PM; Brenda Maray shared a personal story about her sister's battle with cancer, highlighting the pain and suffering her sister endured. She expressed her belief that individuals should have the right to choose how they live and die, supporting HB254 as it aligns with the concept of individual choice and New Hampshire's motto 'Live Free or Die'.
HB254: John Jersi, President of St Joseph Hospital, Nashua Oppose04:50:20.760 - 1:19:16 PM; John Jersi, as a healthcare provider, opposed HB254, arguing that the primary duty of healthcare providers is to preserve life, not end it. He expressed concerns about the accuracy of prognosis, potential coercion, and the availability of palliative care as alternatives to medical aid in dying. Jersi emphasized that medical aid in dying could undermine the trust in the patient-provider relationship and advocated for enhancing palliative and hospice care services to ensure patients die with dignity and without distress.
HB254: Colin McNab, Director of Mission and Spiritual Care at St Joseph's Hospital, Nashua Oppose04:55:20.718 - 1:24:16 PM; Colin McNab opposed HB254 by invoking the New Hampshire Constitution's affirmation of the right to life. He argued that assisted suicide goes against this right and the teachings of his faith, emphasizing the importance of natural death and the role of healthcare chaplains in supporting patients through their final days. McNab urged the committee to defend life and reject the legalization of suicide.
HB254: Dr. Michelle Flynn, Retired Internal Medicine Physician Oppose04:56:53.920 - 1:25:49 PM; Dr. Michelle Flynn opposed HB254, stressing the Hippocratic Oath's principle of 'Do no harm' and arguing that physicians should not participate in ending patients' lives. She expressed concerns about the potential for a 'slippery slope' seen in other jurisdictions, where assisted suicide has expanded beyond its initial scope. Flynn advocated for improvements in palliative and hospice care as alternatives to medical aid in dying and raised concerns about the distressing complications associated with the methods used for assisted suicide.
HB254: Dr. Scott Dyer, Clinical Ethics, Professor at Keene State College Support05:02:21.320 - 1:31:17 PM; Dr. Scott Dyer supported HB254, citing the principle of 'Live Free or Die' and the right to self-determination, particularly in the context of terminal illness. He referenced legal precedents supporting patients' rights to refuse treatment and argued that similar principles should apply to medical aid in dying. Dyer dismissed concerns about a slippery slope, highlighting the strict regulatory framework of laws like Oregon's and arguing that patient autonomy, beneficence, and non-maleficence support the right to choose medical aid in dying.
HB254: Katie Kelly, Policy Council Attorney with Americans United for Life Oppose05:06:44.080 - 1:35:40 PM; Katie Kelly opposed HB254, focusing on the bill's lack of mandatory mental health evaluation for patients requesting medical aid in dying. She pointed out the high prevalence of depression among adults in New Hampshire and the potential for inadequate screening under the bill. Kelly argued that this could lead to discrimination against vulnerable individuals and urged the committee to review the specific provisions of the bill that she believes are flawed.
HB254: Rebecca Leak, Andover Oppose05:10:04.840 - 1:39:00 PM; Rebecca Leak from Andover opposed HB254 but her testimony was cut off, so the specific details of her opposition were not captured in the transcript.
HB254: Rebecca Leak, Andover Oppose05:10:12.360 - 1:39:08 PM; Rebecca Leak opposed HB254, arguing that life is sacred from conception to natural death. She stated that state-sanctioned suicide is immoral and dangerous, fostering a culture of death rather than life. She highlighted the risk to young people, citing a CDC study showing 10% of high schoolers attempted suicide in 2021. Leak expressed concerns about the slippery slope of such legislation, referencing Canada's expansion of medical assistance in dying (MAID) to include incurable patients, mental illness, and drug addicts. She noted documented misuse and abuse of MAID in Canada and the Netherlands, including cases where doctors suggested MAID before patients did. Leak argued that the bill's requirement of a six-month prognosis is unreliable, as some live much longer. She urged the committee to recommend the bill as inexpedient to legislate.
HB254: Megan Smith, Bow Support05:13:00.638 - 1:41:56 PM; Megan Smith supported HB254, sharing her personal experience with her father's terminal illness. She described his suffering and inability to control his dying process, expressing that medical aid in dying (MAID) would have allowed him a peaceful and dignified death surrounded by family and friends. As a nurse and doctoral student, Smith has researched MAID and believes it offers autonomy, dignity, and compassion to terminally ill patients. She emphasized New Hampshire's 'Live Free or Die' motto, suggesting the state should allow terminally ill individuals the option to die on their terms.
HB254: Kurt Welper, Strafford, New Hampshire Right to Life Oppose05:16:47.920 - 1:45:43 PM; Kurt Welper, representing New Hampshire Right to Life, opposed HB254. He distributed packets highlighting issues with MAID in Canada and other countries. Welper argued that the bill's protections are inadequate and unenforceable, particularly concerning coercion and mental health assessments. He shared personal experiences with family members who suffered from terminal illnesses but found peace through existing hospice care. Welper stated that the bill is unnecessary and warned that implementing MAID could increase overall suicide rates by 6.3%, leading to additional deaths in New Hampshire.
HB254: Suzanne Steel Support05:20:51.320 - 1:49:47 PM; Suzanne Steel spoke in support of HB254, sharing her husband's eight-year battle with atypical Parkinson's disease. She described his loss of mobility and joy in life, emphasizing his constant pain and helplessness. Steel believed that having the option of MAID could have restored some sense of control and peace for her husband. She advocated for the bill to allow those who meet the criteria to die with dignity and peace, aligning with New Hampshire's 'Live Free or Die' ethos.
HB254: Melinda Sims, Disabled Veteran Oppose05:23:54.480 - 1:52:50 PM; Melinda Sims, a disabled veteran, opposed HB254, labeling it as 'deadly' and a form of giving up on people like her. She highlighted the rapid increase in MAID deaths in Canada and expressed concern over the financial motivations behind such programs, including cost savings and organ donations. Sims argued that the bill threatens veterans and disabled individuals, who already face bias and poverty. She emphasized the value of disabled lives and urged the committee to stand against normalizing suicide as a solution, rejecting the notion of putting a price tag on human life.
HB254: Claic Kelly, Epsom Support05:28:57.958 - 1:57:53 PM; Claic Kelly, a resident of Epsom, testified in favor of HB254, the New Hampshire End of Life Freedom Act. She shared her personal experience of her husband's battle with cancer and his desire to die peacefully in New Hampshire. However, due to the absence of such a law, he had to travel to Vermont for medical aid in dying. Kelly emphasized that this bill is not about disability, suicide, or religion but about giving terminally ill individuals the option to end their suffering and maintain their dignity. She highlighted the importance of personal freedom and conscience in making end-of-life decisions and expressed her commitment to continue fighting for this cause.
HB254: Norman Tibo, Bedford Oppose05:31:16.680 - 2:00:12 PM; Norman Tibo from Bedford spoke in opposition to HB254. He shared his personal experience with cancer and raised concerns about the potential unintended consequences of the bill, particularly regarding insurance coverage and healthcare decisions. Tibo questioned whether insurance companies might deny costly treatments in favor of the less expensive option of assisted suicide. He expressed worry that the bill could lead to coercion and pressure on patients and families, potentially resulting in conflicts and guilt. Tibo concluded by urging the committee to consider these consequences and vote against the bill.
HB254: Kelly Paten, Representative from Strafford District 19, Rochester Oppose05:36:02.320 - 2:04:58 PM; Representative Kelly Paten from Strafford District 19, representing Rochester Wards 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6, expressed strong opposition to HB254. She shared personal experiences of loved ones passing through hospice care and emphasized the comfort and dignity provided by existing end-of-life care options in New Hampshire. Paten argued that there is no need for the bill, citing the effectiveness of current palliative care and hospice services. She expressed concern about the potential for a slippery slope and the unnecessary nature of the legislation in the state.
HB254: Reverend Peter Fredericks, Keene Support05:38:21.638 - 2:07:17 PM; Reverend Peter Fredericks from Keene, a retired Unitarian Universalist Minister and a member of the New Hampshire Alliance for End of Life Options, supported HB254. He shared his experiences with the terminally ill and argued that the bill offers control to those facing the end of their lives. Fredericks highlighted that the legislation is modeled after successful laws in other states and emphasized that it does not increase suicide rates or endanger vulnerable populations. He stressed the importance of compassion and the right to a peaceful end for those with terminal illnesses.
HB254: Rod Sims, Epsom Oppose05:42:00.120 - 2:10:56 PM; Rod Sims from Epsom, whose wife Melinda is a disabled veteran, opposed HB254. He expressed concerns about the potential for the bill to expand beyond its initial scope, citing examples from the Netherlands and Canada. Sims argued that existing palliative care and hospice services can manage end-of-life suffering effectively and worried that the bill could lead to cost-cutting measures by insurance companies, potentially endangering vulnerable individuals. He shared personal anecdotes about his wife's experiences and emphasized the need to maintain safeguards for those with disabilities.
HB254: Charlene Joyce, Campton Oppose05:45:49.478 - 2:14:45 PM; Charlene Joyce from Campton, who recently became a U.S. citizen, opposed HB254 based on her personal experience with her sister's battle with leukemia. She recounted how her sister's children, who lived far away, had to leave after an extended period, and her sister felt pressured to accept a lethal injection due to the prolonged situation. Joyce argued that this was not a natural death and emphasized her belief in life from conception to natural death, urging the committee not to pass the bill.
HB254: Margaret Matthews, Durham Support05:48:28.920 - 2:17:24 PM; Margaret Matthews, a resident of Durham, New Hampshire, testified in favor of HB254. She shared her personal story of being diagnosed with a fatal disease and having been given 18 months to live two years ago. As a performing artist and recipient of the Governor's 2013 Bed Kobe Living Treasure Award, she emphasized her autonomy and the right to decide when to end her life. She expressed her desire for a comfortable death, not wanting to suffer as others have from conditions like lung cancer. Matthews underscored the importance of living free in New Hampshire until her last breath, without being influenced by others' beliefs or religions.
HB254: Bishop Peter Libasci, Manchester Oppose05:50:48.798 - 2:19:44 PM; Bishop Peter Libasci, the Roman Catholic Bishop of Manchester, opposed HB254. He discussed the importance of accurate death certificates and the forensic evidence needed to determine the cause of death. He raised concerns about the bill's requirement for free will and consent, explaining its implications for Catholics, particularly in terms of mortal sin. Libasci suggested that the bill could lead to a 'very terrible situation' and might be perceived as a persecution of their faith, as it could influence individuals to make choices against their religious beliefs.
HB254: Kelly Rodford, unspecified location Support05:55:38.760 - 2:24:34 PM; Kelly Rodford, a board-certified licensed massage therapist with 25 years of experience and an end-of-life doula, supported HB254. She explained that certain terminal conditions are unmanageable by hospice care, such as bleeding to death due to ruptured cancerous tumors. Rodford described the traumatic experiences of patients and their families, who are advised to prepare with dark towels to manage blood during the dying process. She argued that the terminally ill deserve better and urged support for the New Hampshire End of Life Freedom Act to end avoidable suffering.
HB254: Susan Jenden, Londonderry Oppose05:58:00.958 - 2:26:56 PM; Susan Jenden from Londonderry opposed HB254, citing its problematic sections. She criticized the vague definition of 'attending healthcare provider' and the lack of assurance that the provider would be a primary care physician familiar with the patient. Jenden also expressed concerns about the ability of mentally capable individuals to be influenced and the lack of detail on what happens after a patient takes the prescribed pills, questioning the possibility of withdrawing consent post-ingestion. She referenced stories from Canada about coercion and argued that the bill preempts God's plan for individuals, suggesting better education through hospice services.
HB254: Tom Fennell, unspecified location Support06:01:10.798 - 2:30:06 PM; Tom Fennell, a hospice volunteer in Greater Nashua, supported HB254. Coming from a family of first responders, he shared his experience as a last responder in hospice care. Fennell explained that his role involves various tasks, including companionship and participating in veteran ceremonies. He reviewed the bill's qualifications and safeguards, finding them sound based on his discussions with volunteers from Vermont and Maine. He encouraged committee members to consider becoming hospice volunteers, emphasizing the positive impact it has on both the volunteer and the patients.
HB254: Bonnie Dunham, Marlow Oppose06:05:54.798 - 2:34:50 PM; Bonnie Dunham from Marlow opposed HB254, sharing her personal experience of providing end-of-life care for her husband's brother. As a parent of an adult son with disabilities, she expressed fear that the bill could harm vulnerable populations, citing historical practices with infants with Down syndrome. Dunham referenced former Governor Maggie Hassan's veto message on a related bill, highlighting the precarious path it sets. She discussed the AMA's stance on assisted suicide and the National Council on Disability's report on its dangers, particularly to people with disabilities. She argued for better solutions than legalizing assisted suicide, pointing out the risk of suicide contagion.
HB254: Reverend Mary James, Durham Support06:08:59.878 - 2:37:55 PM; Reverend Mary James from Durham, a retired United Church of Christ minister, supported HB254. She shared her experience with many dying individuals, including her husband Bob, who suffered a traumatic death despite receiving hospice care. James emphasized that Medical Aid in Dying would have allowed her husband a peaceful death, aligning with his wishes. She argued that the option is compassionate and ethical, respecting the rigorous safeguards and the individual's right to choose. James questioned who benefits from denying terminally ill individuals this choice, advocating for the freedom to choose a gentle, caring option.
HB254: Alexander Landrian, Madbury Oppose06:12:49.320 - 2:41:45 PM; Alexander Landrian from Madbury opposed HB254, highlighting the impact of suicide on his generation. He shared a personal story of a friend's suicide attempt and expressed concern about the rising suicide rates, particularly among youth and the LGBTQ+ community. Landrian argued that legalizing Medical Aid in Dying sends a dangerous message that suicide can be acceptable and dignified, potentially undermining suicide prevention efforts. He urged investment in palliative care and mental health services instead of normalizing suicide, emphasizing the importance of cultural and moral stances against it.
HB254: Rilen Shippy, Nottingham Support06:16:01.760 - 2:44:57 PM; Rilen Shippy from Nottingham strongly supported HB254, known as the New Hampshire End of Life Freedom Act. As a registered nurse with over 50 years of experience, Shippy shared a personal story of her father's self-inflicted gunshot wound due to unbearable pain from a chronic illness. She argued that Medical Aid in Dying would have allowed her father a peaceful death surrounded by family, rather than the violent end he experienced. Shippy emphasized the need for medical support to help terminally ill patients achieve their goals of pain relief and a peaceful death, urging representatives to enact the bill.
HB254: George Kramlinger, Dover Oppose06:20:15.240 - 2:49:11 PM; George Kramlinger, a resident of Dover and a military officer veteran with 26 years of service, as well as a professional firefighter, opposes HB254. He argues that the bill, which would legalize suicide for any reason, has the unintended consequence of lowering the threshold of societal acceptance of suicide. He emphasizes the high suicide rates among military personnel and first responders, highlighting the stress and trauma they endure. Kramlinger believes that instead of legalizing suicide, society should provide more support to these individuals to prevent them from taking their own lives.
HB254: Jill Fimble, Amherst Support06:21:23.680 - 2:50:19 PM; Jill Fimble, a mental health provider from Amherst, supports HB254. She shared a personal story about her father who researched various methods to end his life due to lack of humane options. Fimble differentiates between suicide driven by emotional pain, which has treatment options, and medically assisted suicide for those in physical pain due to terminal illness. She believes that if the bill passes, she and her colleagues could ensure its safe implementation through additional training and ethical standards. She also mentioned her certification in psychedelic-assisted therapy, which helps with existential crises at the end of life, suggesting that passing HB254 could complement this form of care.
HB254: Father Andrew Nelson, Somersworth Oppose06:24:52.840 - 2:53:48 PM; Father Andrew Nelson from Somersworth opposes HB254. As a priest who has attended over a thousand deaths, he has observed that the primary concern of those at the end of life is the worry for those they leave behind, not a desire for death. He argues that the bill could send a message that the answer to suffering is death, which could be dangerous for vulnerable individuals. He cites a study indicating that the suicide of a spouse or family member significantly increases the likelihood of others committing suicide, suggesting that legalizing physician-assisted suicide could contribute to a cultural shift towards accepting suicide as a solution to suffering.
HB254: Katherine Brown, Rye Support06:28:45.600 - 2:57:41 PM; Katherine Brown from Rye supports HB254 and read a statement from Dr. Philip Lawson of the Littleton area, who could not attend. Dr. Lawson, a physician with 30 years of experience, has seen his patients' desire for access to medical aid in dying (MAID) as a comfort and a sense of control, even if they might not use it. He has encountered situations where suffering could not be alleviated despite best efforts and believes that MAID should be an option to honor patients' values during their final hours. He supports the bill, believing that medical professionals can uphold the necessary ethical standards.
HB254: James Farrell, Lee Oppose06:32:04.680 - 3:01:00 PM; James Farrell from Lee opposes HB254, arguing that it is dishonestly framed as not being about assisted suicide, when it clearly is. He criticizes the bill's language for attempting to make assisted suicide more palatable and points out the ethical and moral implications of not recording such deaths as suicides on death certificates. Farrell suggests that the bill should be called something more honest, like the 'Help Sick People Kill Themselves with Poison Act,' and opposes it due to these concerns.
HB254: Gordon Ly, Kingston Support06:35:52.280 - 3:04:48 PM; Gordon Ly from Kingston supports HB254 and shares his late wife Marcy's end-of-life story. Marcy, who battled cancer for six years, wanted a peaceful and dignified death at home but faced challenges due to the lack of legal options like MAID in New Hampshire. They considered options in Vermont and Switzerland but were hindered by residency requirements and border closures. Ly emphasizes the need for a legal option in New Hampshire to provide terminally ill individuals and their families with a better, less stigmatized choice for end-of-life care.
HB254: Steve Wade, The Brain Injury Association of New Hampshire, New Hampshire Coalition of Suicide Prevention Oppose06:39:29.958 - 3:08:25 PM; Steve Wade, executive director of The Brain Injury Association of New Hampshire and a member of the New Hampshire Coalition of Suicide Prevention, spoke in opposition to the Medical Aid in Dying bill. He expressed concerns about the impact on the disability community, particularly those on Medicaid who often lack access to high-quality palliative care. Wade argued that passing the bill would reduce the incentive to improve palliative care for vulnerable populations, a concern supported by experiences in other states. He also highlighted the risks for veterans with traumatic brain injuries and PTSD, who are at a higher risk for suicide. Wade emphasized that the bill contradicts the efforts to promote help-seeking behaviors and sends the wrong message about societal values. He concluded by stressing the foundational medical ethic of 'Do no harm' which he believes is endangered by the bill.
HB254: Lee May, Kendall retirement community, Handover Support06:43:32.240 - 3:12:28 PM; Lee May, a resident of the Kendall retirement community in Handover, shared personal experiences supporting Medical Aid in Dying. He recounted how his friend's husband used Vermont's Medical Aid in Dying procedure, which resulted in a peaceful death and provided comfort to his widow. Later, the widow herself faced a terminal illness and chose to use the same procedure in Vermont, despite the logistical challenges. May highlighted the serenity and lack of agony in her passing, emphasizing the value of the procedure in providing a dignified end-of-life option.
HB254: Sue Allen, Hollis Oppose06:46:11.520 - 3:15:07 PM; Sue Allen, a resident of Hollis, urged the committee to oppose the Medical Aid in Dying bill. She cautioned against ignoring the outcomes of similar laws in other places, emphasizing that the core issue is the authorization of administering death. Allen shared her aunt's experiences from post-World War II Germany, warning of the slippery slope to the devaluation of life. She also raised concerns about the potential for organ harvesting and stressed the importance of suicide prevention over promotion.
HB254: Mark L'Roy, Contoocook Support06:49:34.120 - 3:18:30 PM; Mark L'Roy, from Contoocook, supported the bill by sharing contrasting end-of-life experiences. He described his friend's mother's peaceful death with Medical Aid in Dying in another state, contrasting it with his father's prolonged and painful death in hospice care. L'Roy argued that the bill would offer a more humane option for terminally ill patients and their families, suggesting that a similar scenario would be preferable for his own family.
HB254: Glenn Cordelli, State Representative, Tuftonborough, Wolfeboro, Brookfield, and New Durham Oppose06:51:53.958 - 3:20:49 PM; Glenn Cordelli, a state representative from Tuftonborough, Wolfeboro, Brookfield, and New Durham, opposed the legislation on personal and policy grounds. He shared his family's experience with his sister's long battle with cancer, highlighting the comfort and faith in her final moments. Cordelli expressed concern that passing the bill would undermine efforts in mental health and suicide prevention, suggesting he would propose a floor amendment to repeal related statutes if the bill were to advance.
HB254: Betsy Walkerman, President of Patient Choices Vermont Support06:54:14.320 - 3:23:10 PM; Betsy Walkerman, president of Patient Choices Vermont, supported the bill based on her organization's 11 years of experience with a similar law in Vermont. She shared the story of Barry Daer, a New Hampshire resident who traveled to Vermont for Medical Aid in Dying due to his terminal lung cancer. Walkerman emphasized the hardship of traveling for this option and noted the growing interest from New Hampshire residents, advocating for the bill to be passed to provide this choice within the state.
HB254: Jules Good, Newmarket Oppose06:59:00.958 - 3:27:56 PM; Jules Good, a non-religious, gay, multiply disabled person and national disability policy professional from Newmarket, testified against HB254. Good argued that the bill could endanger vulnerable disabled people by potentially steering them toward death due to inadequate healthcare access. They emphasized the need for better pain management and support services rather than legalizing assisted suicide, highlighting the privilege of choice that comes with access to high-quality healthcare.
HB254: David Zuckerman, Lieutenant Governor of Vermont Support07:02:06.760 - 3:31:02 PM; David Zuckerman, Lieutenant Governor of Vermont, supported the Medical Aid in Dying bill from his perspectives as a policy maker and the son of a doctor. He emphasized the importance of patient autonomy in end-of-life decisions and addressed concerns about 'Do no harm' by noting that the choice is about the conditions and timing of death, not death itself. Zuckerman reassured that Vermont's experience showed no slippery slope and highlighted the need for funding mental health and disability services to address related concerns.
HB254: Laura Allison, Greenland Oppose07:05:29.000 - 3:34:25 PM; Laura Allison shared her personal experience with her mother's end-of-life care, highlighting the pressures she faced from medical professionals to place her mother in hospice and use drugs that would lead to her mother's death. She expressed concerns about the slippery slope of medical assistance in dying, particularly how it might be expanded beyond its intended scope. She criticized the bill for potentially leading to a culture of death and stressed the importance of advocating for the wishes of those in care, fearing that the bill might undermine personal autonomy and lead to misuse.
HB254: Linda May, Hanover Support07:10:07.240 - 3:39:03 PM; Linda May supported House Bill 254, sharing a personal story about a friend who used Medical Aid in Dying in Vermont due to a terminal illness. She described the process as peaceful and dignified, emphasizing the importance of allowing individuals to choose how they die when facing imminent death. She urged the committee to extend this option to qualifying New Hampshire residents, highlighting the comfort and control it offers to those at the end of their lives.
HB254: Debbie Richardson, Alexandria Oppose07:13:48.958 - 3:42:44 PM; Debbie Richardson, an OB and hospice nurse, opposed the bill, arguing that life, even in its final stages, is precious. She discussed the flexibility of hospice care and the potential for misuse of Medical Aid in Dying, expressing concerns about government involvement in end-of-life decisions. She believed that peaceful death is achievable through existing medical practices without the need for legislation that could lead to deceitful practices in reporting causes of death.
HB254: Robin Mower, Durham (reading for Jill Robinson, Walpole) Support07:16:39.558 - 3:45:35 PM; Robin Mower read testimony from Jill Robinson, who supported the bill. Jill, a polio survivor and disability rights attorney, expressed understanding for opposition from the disability community due to fears of sanctioned death but argued for the importance of personal control over one's death. She felt the bill provided sufficient safeguards and respected her right to choose.
HB254: Robin Mower, Durham (reading for Zale Barry) Support07:16:39.558 - 3:45:35 PM; Robin Mower also read testimony from Zale Barry, a palliative care physician from Vermont, who supported the bill. Zale explained that Medical Aid in Dying is not primarily driven by inadequate pain control but by the desire for control over one's death. He emphasized the effectiveness of safeguards in existing laws and the importance of this option as an assurance for terminally ill patients.
HB254: Liberty Milner, Barnstead Oppose07:20:08.000 - 3:49:04 PM; Liberty Milner opposed the bill, expressing concerns about its long-term implications and the potential to affirm suicide as an acceptable option. She discussed the impact on young people and those with mental health issues, fearing it could encourage suicide ideation. She drew historical parallels to Nazi Germany, warning of the slippery slope from medical assistance to broader societal harm, and urged lawmakers to affirm the value of life.
HB254: Robert Lws, Pembroke Support07:23:35.478 - 3:52:31 PM; Robert Lws shared personal stories about friends who suffered from cancer to illustrate the need for medical aid in dying. He recounted dining with a coworker who was battling cancer and had a recurrence, expressing her support for medical aid in dying despite not using it for herself. Another story involved a friend whose wife died from lung cancer that had spread to her bones, highlighting the suffering she endured in hospice. Lws argued that the current options of sedation leading to death by dehydration or starvation are inadequate, and emphasized the importance of personal freedom in New Hampshire.
HB254: Hannah Rudy, Manchester Oppose07:27:04.680 - 3:56:00 PM; Hannah Rudy, a palliative care nurse practitioner from Manchester, opposed HB254. She emphasized the importance of respecting life at both its beginning and end, and expressed concerns about the slippery slope and the message the bill sends regarding the dignity and worth of vulnerable populations. Rudy advocated for increased resources and support for palliative care, hospice, and family caregivers rather than providing a means for assisted suicide, arguing that it should not be the only option for end-of-life care.
HB254: Jeffrey Bert, Franconia Support07:29:22.680 - 3:58:18 PM; Jeffrey Bert read a testimony from Lynn Ramboy of Raymond, who has a new diagnosis of metastatic breast cancer. Ramboy shared her experience with cancer treatment and her exploration of end-of-life options, emphasizing the importance of medical aid in dying as an accepted part of compassionate care. She urged the committee to pass the legislation, highlighting her need to plan for her end of life while continuing care for her husband with Alzheimer's.
HB254: Lisa Bodwin, Disability Policy Expert Oppose07:33:23.120 - 4:02:19 PM; Lisa Bodwin, a disability policy expert, opposed HB254 citing evidence of suicide contagion and threats to people with disabilities. She referenced a 70-page white paper by the National Council on Disability, studies showing increased suicide rates in states with assisted suicide laws, and concerns about medical ableism. Bodwin criticized a survey funded by the New Hampshire Alliance for Compassion and Choices and argued that the bill would leapfrog over real healthcare inequities, advocating for better funding and education in palliative care and pain management instead.
HB254: Dr. Gary Soilson, Contoocook Support07:37:10.558 - 4:06:06 PM; Dr. Gary Soilson, a family physician with 40 years of practice, supported HB254. He emphasized patient autonomy and the fear of a painful death among his patients in palliative care, hospice, and nursing homes. Soilson argued that the bill provides a narrow and appropriate tool for end-of-life care, supported by data from other states showing no evidence of misuse. He highlighted the importance of individual autonomy versus collective concern and the need for legislative support to provide better end-of-life care options.
HB254: Dr. Jonathan Edinger, Cardiologist at Catholic Medical Center Oppose07:41:46.878 - 4:10:42 PM; Dr. Jonathan Edinger, a cardiologist and president of the Board of Medicine, opposed HB254. He expressed concerns about the difficulty in distinguishing between chronic and terminal illness, the subjectivity involved in such decisions, and the potential for abuse. Edinger highlighted the challenges in enforcing safeguards and tracking potential misuse, especially with an increasing number of less experienced healthcare providers. He advocated for better physical, psychological, and spiritual care instead of what he sees as an easier, cheaper option.
HB254: Henry Steans, Lawyer Support07:45:38.240 - 4:14:34 PM; Henry Steans, a lawyer, supported HB254 by referencing fundamental laws like the Declaration of Independence and the New Hampshire State Constitution, which he believes affirm the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. He shared his personal experience with his mother's suffering and argued that individuals should have the right to choose how they die, surrounded by loved ones, rather than enduring prolonged suffering. Steans emphasized the need for personal respect and autonomy in end-of-life decisions.
HB254: Aubrey Friedman, Bridgewater Support07:49:32.958 - 4:18:28 PM; Aubrey Friedman from Bridgewater supported HB254, arguing for the right to choose how one dies, especially given the bill's narrow scope. He acknowledged concerns about potential abuse but felt the bill's guardrails were adequate. Friedman criticized the part of the bill regarding death certificates, calling it dishonest, but still supported the bill overall for its intent to give people choices at the end of life.
HB254: Steve Gordon, Lawyer Support07:52:37.840 - 4:21:33 PM; Steve Gordon, a lawyer with 50 years of experience, supported HB254, urging the committee to focus on the bill's narrow scope rather than potential future consequences. He emphasized personal autonomy and shared his wish to die surrounded by loved ones rather than in a clinical setting. Gordon argued against the slippery slope argument and advocated for the bill based on the experiences of other states like Vermont and Oregon.
HB254: Lucy Carl, Hopkinton Support07:55:54.840 - 4:24:50 PM; Lucy Carl from Hopkinton, an end-of-life doula, supported HB254, sharing her son's horrific death and her experience as a witness to a peaceful death in Vermont. She criticized the inadequacy of home hospice and argued that the bill is for the dying, not the living or those with disabilities. Carl emphasized the importance of giving dying individuals the autonomy and dignity to choose their end, and refuted claims of unintended consequences based on her experiences.
HB254: Brent Richardson, Chester Support07:59:22.680 - 4:28:18 PM; Brent Richardson, a nurse practitioner and healthcare ethicist from Chester, supported HB254, emphasizing personal autonomy and addressing suffering at the end of life. He corrected misstatements about the bill's provisions, such as not involving intravenous administration of medications. Richardson advocated for the bill as a means to provide dignity and peace at the end of life, and offered to answer any questions the committee might have.

Lynn, Bob(Chairman)(R)[B]2025	Kuttab, Katelyn(Clerk)(R)[B]2025	Mannion, Dennis(V Chairman)(R)[B+]2025
Smith, Marjorie(D)[F]2025	Bergeron, Dan(D)[F]2025	Horrigan, Timothy(D)[F]2025
Berch, Paul(D)[F]2025	Turer, Eric(D)[F]2025	Scully, Kevin(R)[A-]2025
Tripp, Richard(R)[B]2025	Andrus, Louise(R)[C+]2025	Ball, Lorie(R)[B+]2025
Manos, Zoe(D)[CT]2025	Perez, Kristine(R)[B+]2025	Alexander, Joe(R)[A+]2025
McFarlane, Donald(R)[A]2025	Rombeau, Catherine(D)[CT]2025	Paige, Mark(D)[D-]2025