Assisted Suicide Laws Violate the Americans with Disabilities Act

"death with dignity", aid in dying, Americans with Disabilities Act, assisted suicide, court cases, medical discrimination, Our News & Commentary Blog, , , ,

Cartoon drawing of wheelchair user looking at stairs to a suicide prevention door while pointed to an access ramp to an assisted suicide door.

Assisted suicide laws violate the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) but not in the way that proponents probably think. Some have argued that the ADA requires active euthanasia for qualified people whose disabilities make it difficult to self-administer lethal drugs, a sort of “reasonable accommodation” theory. Some have suggested that the U.S. should adopt the Canadian approach of medically assisting the deaths of people with non-terminal health conditions (i.e., disabilities).

In contrast, from our beginning in 1996, we see a more fundamental form of disability discrimination in assisted suicide laws. They set up a two-tiered system where some people who express suicidal feelings get suicide prevention while others get suicide assistance and the difference is disability. Not Dead Yet has detailed this ADA violation in friend-of the-court briefs over the years, but we have now joined with three other disability and patient advocacy groups and two disabled individuals in a lawsuit taking this social justice argument to the next level. It’s the fight for our lives.

Here are some key excerpts from the lawsuit website:

The System Is Broken

The system is broken, inequities in healthcare abound, and insurers care more about their bottom line than people.

Throughout modern history to the present day, the lives of people with disabilities have been devalued in a society that sees our lives as less worth living, less worthy of scarce medical resources and healthcare dollars, better off dead.

We are individuals with disabilities and non-profit organizations that work for disability and patient rights. As we find ourselves fighting for healthcare equity – the basic care, long term services and supports, and durable medical equipment we need to live – enter California’s so-called ‘End of Life Options Act’ (EOLOA).

Under EOLOA, people with life-threatening disabilities and only people with life-threatening disabilities who say they want to die can get a state-facilitated death. Everyone else gets suicide prevention and the protections afforded by the law and professional standards. That’s not choice, it’s eugenics.

People of color, especially those who are economically marginalized, are more likely to be steered towards suicide by their providers, who may view their lives as less worthy of preservation due to the combined forces of racism and ableism. Research has documented Black, Asian, and Hispanic persons regularly experience “barriers to palliative/hospice care utilization.” A 2016 JAMA Internal Medicine study found that hospice patients were less likely to be visited by staff in their last two days of life if they were Black. Even more alarming, California nursing facilities with higher numbers of Black and Latino residents have “had higher rates of death.” Stopping California’s assisted suicide law is both a disability rights and health equity issue.

EOLOA violates the Americans with Disabilities Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and the US Constitution, so we filed a case in federal district court asking for it to be permanently enjoined as inherently discriminatory.

Legal Synopsis

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is an important federal law that prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities in various aspects of life including medical treatment.  The ADA defines disability as a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life functions. The ADA also protects people who have a record of such an impairment, even if they do not currently have a disability, as well as individuals who do not have a disability but are regarded as having a disability.

Individuals who are facing life-threatening conditions qualify as people with disabilities under the ADA, as those conditions themselves not only cause physical and/or mental impairments, but are also impairments that substantially limit major life functions.  The lawsuit seeks to establish that California’s assisted suicide law is a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and the equal protection and substantive due process clauses of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

No state in America criminalizes someone killing themselves, but they do criminalize someone assisting another to take their own life, except in states that have legalized assisted suicide and carved some people out of this protection. In those places, there is a two-tiered system of law and medicine, where a medical professional would be subject to civil and professional liability if they did not provide non-disabled people or people with non-life-threatening disabilities suicide prevention, according to the standard of care, if those people expressed a desire to harm or kill themselves in a medical setting. If those same professionals actually helped the person kill themselves by providing the means, i.e., a prescription for a lethal dose of drugs, that medical professional would also be criminally liable under manslaughter statutes for helping another person die by suicide.

People with life-threatening disabilities, however, are not afforded the same criminal, civil, and professional liability protections as everyone else where assisted suicide is on the books. When they get suicide assistance on the basis of their disability, namely the condition that is given a 6-month or less prognosis, this is treating members of a protected class in a different way than everyone else, thereby violating the anti-discrimination law that protects the civil rights and inherent equal human dignity of people with disabilities.

California’s assisted suicide law, the so-called ‘End of Life Options Act,’ must be struck down as unlawful discrimination in violation of the ADA. Please sign the petition and share it to help fight this discriminatory law.

Good Old News: In Early 2023, Suicidology Group Withdrew Statement NDY Protested

aid in dying, assisted suicide, MAID, Our News & Commentary Blog, protests, suicide prevention, , ,

In October 2017, the American Association of Suicidology (AAS) issued a Statement announcing that physician assisted suicide is not “suicide”. The Executive Summary states:

“The American Association of Suicidology recognizes that the practice of physician aid in dying, also called physician assisted suicide, Death with Dignity, and medical aid in dying, is distinct from the behavior that has been traditionally and ordinarily described as ‘suicide,’ the tragic event our organization works so hard to prevent. Although there may be overlap between the two categories, legal physician assisted deaths should not be considered cases of suicide and are therefore a matter outside the central focus of AAS.”

At their annual conference held seven months later, disability activists protested the Statement and distributed a leaflet to conference attendees, many of whom were previously unaware of the Statement.

In early 2023, according to an online AAS posting, the Statement was “retired.”

Disability activist Meghan Schrader discussed the original Statement and its retirement in her recent article published in the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition blog, which criticizes Thaddeus Pope and others who favor expanding eligibility for assisted suicide to include disabled people without a “terminal” prognosis. The following is the relevant excerpt from her article:

[T]he disabled community is reaping the consequences of a society that is so apathetic toward disabled people’s basic needs that it can’t even be bothered to provide us with suicide prevention. We are dirt. 

…[A]ll self-respecting suicide prevention advocates and organizations really need to do some honest and humble reflection on their silence regarding assisted suicide. Not saying anything while people like [Thaddeus] Pope shamelessly sell suicide to the disabled community communicates that suicide prevention is for ablebodied, neurotypical people. The Canadian Association for Suicide Prevention strongly opposed extending assisted suicide to the disabled community in 2021, but their opposition came too late to prevent the law change. 

Indeed, the American Association of Suicidology’s 2017 statement about “medical aid in dying” being different from suicide had tragic consequences for the disabled community. Regrettably the board had somehow fallen under the influence of assisted suicide advocate, academic Margaret Battin, and its statement about PAS has repeatedly been used to justify PAS in all sorts of different contexts. The 2019 Truchon court decision in Québec which extended euthanasia to people with disabilities, cited the AAS’s statement to support its judgment that “MAiD” for disabled people was not suicide. 

The AAS had made that statement in the context of physician assisted suicide for people with terminal illnesses, but in the end, the organization’s intentions did not matter. Its statement that some suicides weren’t suicides was used to cause multiple disabled Canadian’s suicides. 

To its credit, the AAS became apprised of the genie it had let out of the bottle, and it retracted its statement about PAS not being suicide in 2023. Now the assisted suicide movement has no scientific basis for its assertions that PAS is not suicide. (Link to article)

New Vlog! LGBTQ+ and Disability Pride Special: Ableist Anti-Trans Laws

Our News & Commentary Blog

 

Video Link: https://youtu.be/s6S5cD3_UPo

CW: ableism, suicide, transphobia

As we move from LGBTQIA+ Pride month to Disability Pride Month, we explore an important intersection currently facing disabled transgender people: access to gender affirming care being denied on the basis of disability. We chat with Jen Insight, a trans writer and video creator, about gender affirming care. We also talk to Larkin Taylor-Parker, Litigation Director at the Autistic Self Advocacy Network, about the details of this discriminatory legislation. Finally, we discuss how these laws increase the risk of suicidality in trans disabled people and how a policy of assisted suicide increases that risk even more.

All sources used and mentioned in this episode can be found here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TQQcdHLT4DIRqvZlE3cd8c_Y81lFx60OuYSuSP2GMIQ/edit?usp=sharing

Follow Jen Insight @jen_insight on Twitter and Instagram and  @jeninsight  on YouTube. Follow the Autistic Self Advocacy Network @autselfadvocacy on Twitter and @autisticselfadvocacy on Instagram.

Unfortunately the transcript for this episode came through without any punctuation, which makes it difficult to read. The video is fully captioned with correct punctuation.

Disability Activists Take Direct Action To Resist Assisted Suicide Laws

Our News & Commentary Blog

By Jules Good

On June 14th, NDY and Second Thoughts MA activists gathered at the Massachusetts State House to show opposition to a Compassion and Choices rally. The group made signs and held them up at the back of Nurses Hall, where C&C was hosting a lineup of local speakers before dispersing to meet with legislators to lobby for the passage of H.2246/S.1331 which would legalize assisted suicide in MA. Selected photos and descriptions are below.

STMA member Pamela Daly, as well as NDY’s Assistant Director and Policy Analyst Jules Good, were interviewed by the press. Pam’s interview was featured here, and State House News mentioned our presence and signs here.

Massachusetts’ legislative session moves much more slowly than in other states, so hearings for these bills may not happen for a few more months. We will continue to be in touch with MA legislators to ensure these bills do not pass through committee.

Do you live in MA and want to get involved with this important advocacy work? Reach out to John Kelly, Director of STMA and New England Regional Director for NDY, at secondthoughtskelly@gmail.com .

Seated Signs: left to right, seated: Pam Daly, a white woman with shoulder length hair in a manual wheelchair Ellen Leigh, a white woman in a power wheelchair with shoulder length hair, a mask and eyeglasses, Finn Gardiner, a black man with beard, glasses and a black hat, John Robinson (standing behind), a white man in a green shirt and light slacks with glasses and a facemask, side-view of John Kelly, a balding white man in a power wheelchair with a "Not Dead Yet" T-shirt and a sign. Ellen's sign reads: "Secular Progressive against Assisted Suicide." John's sign says, "it's all about disability and unmet needs: lack of access to home care / healthcare inequities/structural racism / societal ableism. "
Second Thoughts Massachusetts Protesters
Finn Gardiner, a black man with beard, glasses, and a black hat seated holding up a sign reading "we don't need to die to have dignity."
Protester sign reads “we don’t need to die to have dignity.”
L-R, rear, Jules Good holding sign "No health care equity/No real choice/No assisted suicide.", Don Summerfield, a white man in a broad white hat (partially obscured by speaker at podium in foreground) holding obscured sign, and Jess with sign "protect disabled lives!" Foreground: woman speaking at podium, which has sign reading "alleviate suffering/patient choice / strong safeguards"
Disabled protesters hold signs behind pro-assisted suicide speaker

Photo Descriptions:

Seated Signs: left to right, seated: Pam Daly, a white woman with shoulder length hair in a manual wheelchair Ellen Leigh, a white woman in a power wheelchair with shoulder length hair, a mask and eyeglasses, Finn Gardiner, a black man with beard, glasses and a black hat, John Robinson (standing behind), a white man in a green shirt and light slacks with glasses and a facemask, side-view of John Kelly, a balding white man in a power wheelchair with a “Not Dead Yet” T-shirt and a sign. Ellen’s sign reads: “Secular Progressive against Assisted Suicide.” John’s sign says, “it’s all about disability and unmet needs: lack of access to home care / healthcare inequities/structural racism / societal ableism.”

Finn Gardiner, a black man with beard, glasses, and a black hat seated holding up a sign reading “we don’t need to die to have dignity.”

L-R, rear, Jules Good holding sign “No health care equity/No real choice/No assisted suicide.”, Don Summerfield, a white man in a broad white hat (partially obscured by speaker at podium in foreground) holding obscured sign, and Jess with sign “protect disabled lives!” Foreground: woman speaking at podium, which has sign reading “alleviate suffering/patient choice / strong safeguards”

NY Disability Activists Hold Counter-Presence At Pro-Assisted Suicide Press Event

"death with dignity", aid in dying, assisted suicide, center for disability rights, MAID, media coverage, New York, NY Alliance Against Assisted Suicide, NY Assn. on Independent Living, protests, , , ,

Alex Thompson and Max Rodriguez from the NY Association on Independent Living and Center for Disability Rights, respectively, held a counter-presence with signs opposing the NY assisted suicide bill at a press conference conducted today by proponents of the bill. They spoke with several members of the press about the dangers the bill poses for people with disabilities (see written statement below).

The first coverage appeared on WXXI News:

Opponents, including some advocacy groups for people with disabilities, said they fear the measure could be abused.

Alex Thompson with the New York Association of Independent Living said people with disabilities are sometimes misdiagnosed by doctors. He said he worries that could lead some to take their own lives based on an inaccurate prognosis.

“One of the major issues is that it puts the lives of people with disabilities at risk,” Thompson said. “And a lot of the discussion around the issue kind of overlooks the impact on people with disabilities.”

The activists also distributed a Statement consisting of a letter to Senate and Assembly majority leaders. The following are excerpts of that message:

The bill is unacceptable for a wide range of reasons.

First, this bill would likely lead patients to take their own lives based upon inaccurate prognoses. The bill bases eligibility for assisted suicide on a physician’s prognosis that a given patient has no more than six months to live. However, studies show that physicians’ survival estimates for terminally-ill patients are often inaccurate. If assisted suicide were made legal in New York, a patient who received an overpessimistic prognosis might take his or her own life when he or she might otherwise have outlived that prognosis by a substantial period of time. This very real possibility should be unacceptable to all New Yorkers.

…Fifth, assisted suicide laws normalize assisted suicide as an acceptable response to disability. Persons with serious chronic or terminal illnesses often become disabled as their diseases progress. Health professionals and others may incorrectly perceive that those patients have less “quality of life” than healthier persons do. While the rest of society receives suicide prevention education and services from the state, this bill would direct suicide assistance toward certain disabled individuals. This double standard is a form of discrimination against persons with disabilities. Furthermore, an assisted suicide law could cause patients that need assistance with daily living to feel pressured physically, emotionally, and financially to choose suicide.

To read the whole Statement, go HERE.