Dear Judge Cooper,
I am the wife of Thomas William Youk, client of Dr. Kevorkian. As you know I had looked forward to addressing the Court during proceedings ... However, I believe certain information may in fact be relevant to your considerations regarding sentencing, and thank you for taking the time to review the enclosed.
I wish first to clarify that it was at my husband's request that Dr. Kevorkian was contacted. Dr. Kevorkian responded to that request, he did not initiate or solicit the contact.
I believe that understanding how Tom lived his life is integral to understanding how it is that he came to choose to contact Dr. Kevorkian.
Born in 1946, Tom worked throughout his life, starting with a paper route at age ten. He had worked as a chef's assistant, a hospital orderly and was to be trained as an auto mechanic when he was served a draft notice in 1966. He joined the Air Force, where he received excellent marks in training, certificates for outstanding achievement and had one of the highest security clearances. He was honorably discharged as Sergeant from the reserves in 1968. He went to college, earned a degree and made his living as an account ant until the last few years of his life. Some of the things that most troubled him were people who were dishonest, did not
pull their share, or did not follow the rules, to the detriment of others.
I offer this information not only to establish that he was a responsible law abiding citizen of no small distinction but further, to show that he approached his illness as he had approached everything else in his life, with curiosity, determination and a problem solving response...
He had come to the situation where; in addition to reaching the point of only being able to control his thumb and first two forefingers on his right hand, he was losing his ability to speak. In spite of receiving specific medications for these problems, he was having trouble swallowing and was choking. He had a food tube inserted directly into his stomach in late August, however was not metabolizing the food, as his bod ily functions were apparently shutting down. He discovered that his lung capacity had dropped to 25% of his normal, but had determined for himself that he did not wish to be on a ventilator, nor completely dependent on others, in a totally paralyzed body.
I was devastated to realize that in spite of all our efforts, we had come near the end. I was crushed by his decision, but came to realize it was selfish for me to not to support him in his decision. He was not depressed, nor was he a victim. He requested Dr. Kevorkian's help, was grateful for it and therefore could never have been the complainant, as suggested by the prosecution, in any action against Dr. Kevorkian ...
Dr. Kevorkian questioned Tom many times as to his resolve and determined, that in fact Tom was certain of his desire to have the doctor help him to relieve his suffering. I do not agree with the suggestion by the prosecutor, as surmised from the tape, that the doctor seemed cold, clinical or detached.
Of course, I wish that I had been able to speak at the trial, feeling that would have given the jury an opportunity to receive a more balanced view of the facts, but understood the prosecution's concern for a jury nullification based on Tom's situation of being near death.
However, not being able to speak did not allow us an opportunity to address the question of why Tom would have chosen the direct injection over assisted. Tom's sum of body control had been reduced to the limited movement of his thumb and forefinger of his right hand and his mind and appreciation of all things mechanical, found the more failsafe direct injection left less chance for an incomplete event.
On another point to my understanding, the jury was left with little choice. At a conference held on February 22, 1999 at the University of Michigan Law School titled The Press, the Law and Public Policy, Coroner Dragovic spoke to describe·
that there are only three categories as relates to death cause: natural, by your own hand and homicide. Clearly, there needs to be another category, as in Tom's situation.
This act was my husband's acknowledged choice and harmed no one other than himself. My husband was grateful for the doctor's assistance to relieve his suffering and hasten his passing. Tom was not a victim, and to his mind this was not a crime, and most certainly not murder.
I appeal to you on behalf of my husband, myself, and our families, to consider all of the foregoing aspects of the back ground provided herein and ask that you show compassion as well to Dr. Kevorkian in your sentencing. He is a man who is honored by many for having the courage to stand up for them without regard for his personal jeopardy...
And it may be that the event which has brought us together in this court, may not be illegal in our foreseeable future. Perhaps allowing a clemency to a man in our present.
Melody Haskin Youk