Gary Haugen’s Con Job

The only people guaranteed a humane death in the U.S. are the men and women on Death Row.

The rest of us are at the mercy of disease, old age, drunken drivers, war, natural disasters, the list goes on. Some of us will be at the mercy of guys like Gary Haugen. Anyone can suffer an unfair and vindictive death. Haugen is sacrificing nothing by offering to be put to sleep.

He wants us to think otherwise. He wants us to go to bat for him and his associates on Death Row.

“Haugen hopes that his execution will spur efforts to question, investigate and ultimately repeal Oregon’s death penalty — a goal of the activists who are seeking to block his execution,” according to the Statesman Journal.

Haugen told the paper that he is sacrificing himself to protest the “hypocrisy” of the justice system and the “arbitrary and vindictive nature” of the death penalty.

Life is unfair, and so is death. Most of us wouldn’t choose to be sexually assaulted and beaten to death. That’s how Haugen killed his ex-girlfriend’s mother. And we probably wouldn’t choose to die by being stabbed 84 times. That’s how he killed an inmate.

“I’m just so nauseated with the system that I refuse to participate in this anymore,” Haugen told the Statesman Journal. “Believe me, it’s not an easy call by any means, but it’s one I’m willing to make.”

Unlike many of us (including his two victims), Haugen has all kinds of strangers interested in his final days.

There’s Oregonians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty, which is supporting a petition to evaluate Haugen’s mental competency. There’s Illinois Rep. Karen Yarbrough, who is urging Oregonians to ban the death penalty, like her state’s politicians have done. There’s the media, which have been inundated the Oregon’s Department of Corrections with requests to interview Haugen.

If Haugen doesn’t change his mind, or the death penalty opponents don’t succeed, he will die on Aug. 16. His death should be quick and less painful than a trip to the dentist. Perhaps all those strangers who have taken an interest in his life can then turn their attention elsewhere. There are no shortages of good causes. How about finding and helping those seeking a humane death?

The same day that The Oregonian ran a story about the petition to stop Haugen’s execution, the paper also ran a brief about a proposed Oregon law to make it a felony to sell a “suicide kit.” The law was prompted by something called “helium hoods.”

The devices are sold by a 91-year-old California woman, who watched her husband die a prolonged death from colon cancer. The woman is a retired science teacher, and together with her son, they make the $60 kits in her home and sell them under the name GLADD (Good Life and Dignified Death).

They sell about 1,600 kits a year. One of them was bought by a 29-year-old Eugene man, who suffered from a chronic illness, and he used it to kill himself. He also happened to be the son of a federal court judge. Within months of his death, the new law was on its way.

Now this new law, set to take effect in a few days unless Gov. John Kitzhaber vetos it, has removed one of the few humane options available for people who are suffering and don’t want to live.

The new law won’t stop suicides, or fix the suffering of the people who want to die (most of whom are probably not the sons of federal court judges). Why don’t these people merit the same attention that Gary Haugen is receiving?

They are the ones who can righteously claim an unfair death penalty.

– Pamela Fitzsimmons

5 Comments

  • The creature Haugen’s gambit will almost certainly work. If it does not work in the way that he wants (getting his death row confreres a break)it will certainly confirm the righteous in opposition to the death penalty.

    I, personally, favor a more assembly line approach to the dp.

    I am less confident in the “helium hoods” matter, however. I don’t have a rationale for my hesitation and would certainly be grateful for the opportunity to employ one should my life become a burden that I no longer wanted to bear. Neighborhood of cognitive dissonance, i suppose.

    I do believe that when we institute socialized medicine that these decisions will often be taken from private hands and put into those of a government committee.

    What I want and what the government wants often differ.

    Then again as a society that sanctions abortion, is in and out on the death penalty, and suicide I do wish we get some consistency or candor about taking life.

    If I kill a pregnant woman in some locales I could be charged with a double homicide, sentenced to death, and denied my ability to be complicit in my own death by requesting or insisting upon execution.

  • It’s curious how people who tend to be opposed to the death penalty are often in favor of abortion, and vice versa.

    Almost everyone recoils from the subject of suicide — even organizations that are supposedly in favor of a “dignified death.” You’re right, there isn’t much candor when we talk about these subjects. There is mostly lip service about the sanctity of life and some occasional sarcasm.

    Years ago when John Ashcroft was trying to overturn Oregon’s physician-assisted suicide law, I wrote a commentary for the L.A. Times supporting the law. I got a couple of phone calls from people in other states who were seriously ill and had nowhere to turn. They weren’t close enough to death to qualify for hospice. They wanted to die peacefully now instead of slowly disintegrating.

    At the same time, I received several posted comments on various news Web sites from writers dismissing the need for physician-assisted suicide. Their attitude was: “What’s the big deal? Just kill yourself.” It looks like the woman who is selling “helium hoods” realized there was a market. The Oregon legislators who want to outlaw the devices don’t offer any humane alternatives

    I don’t worry about socialized medicine. I worry about an aging population in a country that doesn’t seem to have much use for old people beyond their affiliation with AARP.

    Pamela

  • Lawrence C. wrote:

    I grew up in a family where capital punishment was accepted as wrong. I continued to be opposed to the death penalty. I’m not sure when but I stopped caring. It might have been after the Oklanhoma City bombing. It might have been a reaction to all the stories on TV, in the papers, on the radio, Hollywood movvies. I got tired of how these stories all sounded alike and how they were designed to make me feel sorry for murderers.

    I saw something in the news about this guy you’ve written about. I don’t care if he’s executed. I’ll save my sympathy for someone else.

  • I know what you mean about the stories sounding alike. This past weekend on NPR, there was a story about a man in Texas named Mark Stroman who is going to be executed. According to the story, Stroman’s victim is trying to save him. The victim was shot in the face and survived although he lost sight in one eye. The victim was interviewed and said that, as a Muslim, he couldn’t support the death penalty.

    It was instantly obvious that the reporter (Laura Sullivan) was leaving some crucial details out of this story. First of all, even Texas doesn’t execute people for attempted murder, so clearly Stroman must have done something else besides shoot this one man who survived.

    A quick search online turned up the facts that Sullivan left out in the broadcast: Stroman killed two people, plus he has a long criminal history and is a member of the Aryan Brotherhood prison gang. He is a white supremacist. I guess revealing all of that would have made him less sympathetic.

    Pamela

  • I volunteered at various NPR stations in the West and Midwest over a period of 15 years. I lived with a station manager for 7 years and attended many local and Public Broadcasting confabs.

    I met many nice people during that period, many of them well informed and honest.

    However, I know of no more dishonest and small minded news/entertainment outlet extant. The propaganda is delivered in a friendly college prof or informed friend manner.

    But, they are simply room-toned blowhards drawn from an increasingly parochial pool of talent. I recall being surprised when I heard that two of their top people were married, and the only reason for that announcement was that they were proud that their son was now the man in charge of NPR’s blogging component. Incestuous, close minded, bigoted, they may be cadre, but by gosh they’re friendly cadre.

    The example of the NPR capital punishment story is typical of this outfit. I do not object to their existence. I object to the confiscation of citizen monies to support their little world.

Leave a Reply

Your email is never shared.Required fields are marked *