Last week, Dignity 2012 turned in nearly double the number of signatures they needed to place Death with Dignity on the November ballot.

The work of hundreds of volunteers made it possible to get to this point. Presenting issues to the voters through the ballot in Massachusetts is a long and arduous path. Last fall, Dignity 2012 gathered nearly 85,000 signatures to move to the next major step, which was to have the initiative considered by the State Legislature. Lawmakers had until the beginning of May to act on the measure. They didn't and, the initiative moved to the second signature-gathering phase.

This second round of signature gathering involves a whirlwind of activity. Dignity 2012 had 39 days to mail out thousands of petition sheets with return postage, get the petitions to the 351 Town Clerks, pick up the certified petitions, and file them with the Secretary of the Commonwealth. Volunteers braved all types of weather to gather signatures from people throughout Massachusetts. No one who signed it in the first round could sign during this stage. The petitions then had to be hand sorted and mailed to individual Town Clerks' offices. (The photo above, courtesy of Dignity 2012, is a volunteer working on this monumental process.) Once certified by the Town Clerks, the petitions were filed with the Secretary of the Commonwealth.

In a reasoned move, the British Medical Journal today called for all professional medical bodies in the UK to take a neutral stance on Death with Dignity laws. This viewpoint, put forth in an editorial by Fiona Godlee, Editor-in-Chief of the Journal, urged the British Medical Association (BMA) and the various royal colleges to move their official position on Death with Dignity from opposition to neutrality.

The editorial followed a recent poll of physicians in England asking if they favor or disfavor a move to neutrality. Of 1,000 physician respondents, 62% agreed that the BMA and royal colleges should move to a position of studied neutrality.

Godlee drew parallels to the position of professional medical bodies on the issue of abortion, noting these same organizations were opposed to abortion until a change in the law was imminent. She said, "A change in the law, with all the necessary safeguards, is an almost inevitable consequence of the societal move towards greater individual autonomy and patient choice…and it may not happen until we value death as one of life's central events and learn to see bad deaths in the same damning light as botched abortions."

Death with Dignity has been the topic of debate in England for many years. It's played out in Parliament, in the courts, and in the media.

Robb Miller has been the Executive Director of Compassion & Choices of Washington—an affiliate of Compassion & Choices—since 2000. He was also one of the leaders of the coalition that passed Initiative 1000, the Washington Death with Dignity Act, with nearly 60% of the vote in 2008.

When the Washington Department of Health issued its third annual report on the Washington State Death with Dignity Act in early May, there was little interest from the media and no good news for opponents of patient autonomy at the end-of-life.

The lack of interest from the media tells us there was nothing sensational and no controversies to report. On the other hand, less media coverage means less awareness about the law.

Only 16 more people received prescriptions for life-ending medication as compared to 2010, and only 10 more died after receiving prescriptions. Of the 94 individuals who died, 70 self-administered medication, and 19 didn't—32% of patients who acquired prescriptions in 2011 elected not to take the medication. This is bad news for opponents who claimed that people who use the law would be anxious to die and would take the medication prematurely. The report indicates just the opposite.

There have been a number of recent developments in the Death with Dignity movement. When I was in Massachusetts last week, I took a moment to sit down and chat with Michael Clarke, the Campaign Director at Dignity 2012, to get the latest news on their efforts. Read more about the work they're doing and what you can do to help citizens of a third state learn more about important end-of-life options proposed in the Death with Dignity Act initiative.

Peg Sandeen from Death with Dignity National Center: What's the goal of Dignity 2012?

Dignity 2012: Dignity 2012 is working to pass a Death with Dignity law, similar to the laws in Oregon and Washington. We're focused on a ballot initiative effort to present the question to the voters on the November ballot. As you know, this is the same process which was used to pass the laws in Oregon in 1994 and Washington in 2008.

PS: How has the reception been so far?

Five days before he took medication prescribed under the safeguards of Oregon's Death with Dignity law, Peter Goodwin called me to say goodbye. He struggled with the symptoms of his terminal illness during the call, but our conversation was filled with pauses driven by memories and laughter. We recalled the first time we met—at a forum for medical students at Oregon Health Sciences University (OHSU)—and the last time we saw each other—at a screening of How to Die in Oregon.

It was a privilege to have this conversation. These conversations aren't easy, as it's uncomfortable saying goodbye when it's forever. Without Death with Dignity, though, he likely wouldn't have had the opportunity to say his goodbyes.