It is said two things in life cannot be avoided: death and taxes. That is not entirely true. The truly unscrupulous can evade taxes, or at the very least, a bargain can be struck to make them less onerous. With death, however, there is only one settlement, and that is final.

How we settle the final debt to mortality in the case of terminal illness, and who gets to decide the final terms, is the crux of Senate Bill 668, proposed by three Connecticut senators, Gary Winfield (Tenth District), Eric Coleman (Second District), and Beth Bye (Fifth District), as well as a dozen state representatives, this past January.

“An Act Providing A Medical Option Of Compassionate Aid In Dying For Terminally Ill Adults” proposes “with appropriate protections, at the request of a terminally ill patient who is mentally competent, a physician may prescribe a medication that such patient can self-ingest when and if such patient chooses to avoid prolonged suffering and bring about his or her own peaceful death.”

Terminal illness can be fraught with fear, untreatable pain, and humiliating personal incapacities, rather than the graceful exit from life we all deserve. Medical advancements allow patients to linger at the brink of death in discomfort and despair long after the spark of life has flickered low. Dying is resisted as a natural progression of life. Quantity, rather than quality, of life is the goal.

Dying is a process that is difficult to undergo, and difficult to witness. If a person has had the capacity to determine medical decisions for a lifetime, should the terminally ill adult be forbidden to ask his or her physician to provide a peaceful way to die?

Bill 668 has many safeguards built into it to assuage fears raised by the disabled and to prevent abuse. Two written requests to the patient’s doctor, for aid in dying, must be submitted at least 15 days apart, by the patient only. Each request must be witnessed and attested to that the patient appears to be competent, and is not being coerced. Witnesses must have no financial stake in the passing of the patient.

Aid in dying is not required of the terminally ill. But for those who find that the suffering and humiliation imposed by disease upon their final days is not the death they desire, it should not be illegal or immoral to seek a path to dying with dignity.

The Oregon Death With Dignity Act, made law in 1997, allows the terminally ill to request lethal drugs for self-ingestion. In 2014, 155 people requested this privilege, and according to data compiled on healthoregon.org, 105 people died from taking those drugs. Not all who invoke the right to die ultimately exercise that right; but it may be they died with the comfort of knowing they could make that choice. Connecticut citizens deserve the same option.

Legislators should scrutinize Bill 668, but ultimately, they should summon the courage and compassion to pass this long overdue bill.