Washington Death with Dignity Act
ballot measure in Washington legalizing some assisted suicide
Initiative 1000 (I-1000) of 2008 established the U.S. state of Washington's Death with Dignity Act (RCW 70.245), which legalizes medical aid in dying with certain restrictions. Passage of this initiative made Washington the second U.S. state to permit some terminally ill patients to determine the time of their own death. The effort was headed by former Governor Booth Gardner.
The measure was approved in the November 4, 2008 general election. 1,715,219 votes (57.82%) were cast in favor, 1,251,255 votes (42.18%) against. There were 2,966,474 votes total. 30 of the state's 39 counties voted in favor of the initiative.
In 1991, the similar initiative 119 was rejected by Washington voters by a margin of 54 percent to 46 percent. I-119 would have allowed doctors to prescribe a lethal dosage of medication, and also to administer it if the terminally ill patient could not self-administer.
Unlike that initiative, I-1000 requires the patient to ingest the medication unassisted.
This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Washington Death with Dignity Act” as ballot measure in Washington legalizing some assisted suicide. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.
Why this record matters
The subject matters to the general reference register because the source frames it as ballot measure in Washington legalizing some assisted suicide. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.
Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated May 27, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q1500780. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1000, 2008 and 1991.
Overview language is designed for orientation and should not be treated as a substitute for the evidence cited beneath it. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Washington Death with Dignity Act”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Washington Death with Dignity Act primary sources, Washington Death with Dignity Act archive and Washington research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Washington Death with Dignity Act”?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Washington Death with Dignity Act” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.