Wednesday, January 5, 2022

2022 Assisted Suicide US Predictions.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

I predict that 2022 will be a very active year for US assisted suicide bills, especially in the eastern US. The US assisted suicide lobby are sponsoring bills in many states, but they are focusing on New York and Massachusetts. I predict that they will also focus on bills in Connecticut and Maryland.

The assisted suicide lobby have invested significant money into 2022 campaigns as they fear that they may lose supportive seats in the November 2022 mid-term elections.

I also predict that in many states, the bill that will be debated will be similar to the New Mexico bill (HB 47) that passed in 2021. New Mexico has the most extreme assisted suicide law in America.

Among other things, New Mexico Bill HB 47 approved:
  • Expanded who can approve and prescribe assisted suicide by creating the term health care provider which includes advanced nurses, and other non-physicians.
  • Required a 48 hour waiting period (rather than a 15 day waiting period) that could be waived if the person is nearing death (same day death).
  • Waives approval by a second health care provider if the person is enrolled in a hospice program.
  • Trampled on conscience rights for medical professionals.
Assisted suicide expansion laws.

When examining the assisted suicide expansion bills and the court cases to expand assisted suicide, clearly these laws are expanding over time. Legislatures pass assisted suicide laws with "safeguards" that are designed to sell legalization.

In 2022, the assisted suicide lobby will continue to support bills to expand current assisted suicide laws. In 2021, California, Hawaii, Vermont and Washington State had bills to expand their current assisted suicide regimes, only the California bill passed. Assisted suicide expansion bills in Hawaii, Vermont, Oregon and Washington state will be strongly pushed in 2022.

Most of these bills concern lessening or waiving waiting periods, expanding who can approve assisted suicide and trampling on conscience rights.

There are several court cases to legalize or expand US assisted suicide laws.

The assisted suicide lobby has launched court cases to expand assisted suicide and euthanasia in the United States, because other jurisdictions, such as Canada, have legalized and expanded euthanasia through the courts.

The California (Shavelson) case states that people with disabilities, due to their physical abilities, are experience discrimination with the California assisted suicide law. Shavelson et al argues that the law must be permit death by lethal injection (euthanasia) to enable equality under the law. 

The Shavelson case is not asking the court to expand the assisted suicide law, but rather it is asking the court to legalize euthanasia, which is a form of homicide. (Link to article on the case). If an activist judge agrees with Shavelson, the door to euthanasia in every state that permits assisted suicide will be opened.

The Oregon (Gideonse) case is challenging the residency requirement in the Oregon assisted suicide law. The Gideonse case is arguing that a patient, who lives in Washington state, should be permitted to die by assisted suicide in Oregon. If an activist judge agrees with Gideonse et al, then every American will be able to die by assisted suicide in Oregon. (Link to an article on the case).

The Massachusetts (Kligler) case claims that prosecuting doctors for prescribing lethal assisted suicide drugs violates the Massachusetts State Constitution. (Link to an article on the case). 

I believe that even though the Kligler case focuses on the Massachusetts State Constitution, that it may be used to challenge the Supreme Court 1997 Glucksberg decision that found that there was no right to assisted suicide.

The Minnesota Final Exit Network case is a continuation of previous cases are challenging the Minnesota law prohibiting assisted suicide based on free speech statutes. I personally think that the Final Exit Network case will fail again. (Link to an article on the case).

The assisted suicide lobby will continue to lobby is hoping to win in New York. They have put a lot of money into this campaign.

Assisted suicide laws give medical professionals the right in law to cause your death. These laws are not about choice or autonomy but abandonment and physician control.

We need a society that cares not kills its citizens.


A. Valstar said...

Who are the people behind the suicide lobby? Who funds the suicide lobby? Are the politicians who are in favour of euthanasia or assisted suicide connected in any way to funding groups? Is any pharmaceutical company connected to any funding groups?

dougsned said...

Assisted-suicide is being legalized in more countries and states. More and more people (according to polls) want control in how they die should they suffer from a debilitating and irremediable illness or condition without having to suffer. I know this because I live in a country that already permits this, and have had a family member go through the procedure over early onset dementia.

We've had no control on our births; so we would like control on our deaths. This is the message people are saying in places where assisted-suicide is being legalized.

Such a thing is complete blasphemy to Christians. Nothing is more blasphemous to a Christian than choosing to end your own life instead of "waiting until god takes you" which is a natural death. Because you see, Christianity fetishizes suffering. It teaches that the more you suffer, the closer you are to Jesus and God. Have something like Alzheimers or severe Multiple Sclerosis? You have to bear all that suffering just like how Christ suffered on the cross, and because God intended for you to do so.

This exact line of reasoning is what Mother Theresa used to justify not giving painkillers and other medications to the patient that were suffering in her "hospital" from injuries, diseases, and disorders. Her "hospital" didn't even have any qualified medical staff either.

All this suffering we endure in this life won't be for nought as you will be rewarded in heaven for it so as long as you believe in Jesus and the Abrahamic god. This is what Christians believe. These people will make the lives of many an absolute hell on earth because they believe heaven comes after. This is why Christian churches and priests of all denominations are by far and large the biggest opponents of assisted-suicide globally. No other religion has ever caused as much suffering as Christianity has throughout mankind's history.

The citizens of a couple of countries last year told the churches that opposed said law that they will no longer self-flagellate themselves because God and Jesus said so. As a result, assisted-suicide managed to pass in these nations. In other countries however the church won. The fight will continue to happen however until it passes.

Benny said...


I have rarely read a more absurd and blatantly anti-Christian comment than yours. You say: "No other religion has ever caused as much suffering as Christianity has throughout mankind's history." Where did you obtain that "fact"? From one of you bigoted, religion-hating professors?

Add to that your statement "Christianity fetishizes suffering" shows a complete lack of understanding of the Christian principles behind its teachings. That you defame a woman who was one of the greatest humanitarians ever, adds rancid frosting to your "cake of hatred."

BTW assisted suicide and euthanasia have only been legalized in "Christian" countries. NOT in Moslem, Hindu, Buddhist, or officially atheistic Communist countries. I wonder why. Maybe because it is naturally a wrong that all societies can agree to oppose.

dougsned said...

I stand by my statement of Christianity glorifying suffering and treating it as a virtue. The suffering that Christ experienced on the cross is constantly invoked as a virtuous thing and an ideal of which to follow. You have Christian sects in some countries that still flagellate themselves with disciplines to the point of drawing blood because they see it as bringing one's self closer to god. Christians will make a hell of this earth because they believe heaven will come after, that all this suffering we experience in this life will mean something after we die. Suffering is noble and a fetish in Christianity. You can also see this with abortion and banning abortion for cases where the fetus is deformed and will experience nothing but suffering and pain until it dies at the moment of birth.

Yes, I detest Christianity. I'm not going to pretend otherwise. I don't dislike it because it espouses a belief in god itself, but because it actively forces its beliefs and values onto others. Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism, etc, doesn't do this. To be fair all Abrahamic religions do this, but out of all the three Christianity is the worst offender. What more to expect than a religion that preaches the concept of original sin, and teaches that everyone is born a sinner with salvation only possible through Christ?

Mother Theresa denied painkillers to her patients who were suffering greatly because she fetishized suffering and saw it as a way to become closer to Jesus. That's not me making stuff up and slandering someone without cause. This is a documented fact that you can easily Google. This is the very essence of Christianity: To suffer is to become closer to God. CS Lewis (himself a Christian by the way) was absolutely right when he said it'd be preferable to live under robber barons then under a tyranny that is exercised "for the good of its people". The baron's cruelty will abate from time to time, those who torture us for our own "good" will do so perpetually because they do so in the approval of their own conscience.

"BTW assisted suicide and euthanasia have only been legalized in "Christian" countries. NOT in Moslem, Hindu, Buddhist, or officially atheistic Communist countries. I wonder why. Maybe because it is naturally a wrong that all societies can agree to oppose."

Most of the citizenry in the Netherlands and Belgium nowadays are irreligious and secular. They might celebrate Christian holidays but very few of them actually believe in a god, or follow the tenets of the religion and attend church. And poll after poll (even in countries where PAS is not legal) consistently show that the majority of the populace is in favor of it being legalized.

The trajectory is like abortion: abortion also started being legalized in western nations that have historically been Christian. It is now legal in Christian, Hindu, Buddhist, Irreligious, etc, countries. Granted these countries have differing abortion laws with some only permitting it in cases of deformities, rape, or a danger to the life of the mother for a example. This stands in opposition to abortion being allowed on demand in the western. However very, very few countries in the world ban abortion completely. This was not the case 40-50 years ago.

A few US states are going in the opposite direction in regards to this issue. Thus you end up with a scenario in which very religious countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran (both of these nations have more exemptions and a greater term limit) end up with LESS restrictive abortion laws than Texas which bans abortions past six weeks completely.

So yes, the process might be starting in countries that are historically very Christian but there isn't any indication that suggests that legalization will only be limited to those countries. Nothing in Hindu or Buddhist scripture prohibits PAS.

Unknown said...

Very well written summary of upcoming events Alex. Food for prayer. Happy New Year and thank you

Benny said...


Well, you responding comment certainly proves me right. Your hatred of religion in general, and Christianity in particular, is striking. Very curious is the fact that you can't see that your hatred is misplaced (Christianity is the most peaceful and humanitarian of religions) and infantile (like not capitalizing the word "God").

You're right about one thing - "Netherlands and Belgium nowadays are irreligious and secular." This is the main reason that they have turned their backs on treating human like as important and have embraced pagan practices like the murder of the weak and vulnerable people of society - euthanizing the mentally ill, the depressed, the physically disabled, etc.

dougsned said...

I don't hate religion because it's religion. If it gives you a sense of purpose and meaning in life that's a good thing. I hate it when you shove your religious values and tenets onto people who want nothing to do with it. Like I said, I'm not Hindu, Jain, Sikh, or Buddhist; I respect them however because they respect me and don't force their religion onto me. Christianity is notorious for the opposite however. Hence why I greatly dislike it.

Are you seriously arguing that Christianity is the most peaceful religion to have ever existed? That is simply absurd. There have been wars over the correct interpretation of the religion itself! When did Jains and Buddhists have wars? When did they burn "heretics" or people who disbelieved at the stake? Christianity has resulted in millions of deaths, both direct and indirect in history in its spread. It's not the only religion to have resulted in this to be fair, as the spread of Islam also left a lot blood.

The Netherlands and Belgium are far more humane and advanced than where you're from (I'm guessing the US). The absolute state of healthcare and society in general in the US is far, far, worse than the NL and BE contrary to what people like Wesley J. Smith say, or politicians like Rick Santorum who think the elderly all wear "do not euthanize me" bracelets. They aren't perfect countries by any means but no other developed country comes close to having the smorgasbord of issues the US suffers from.

I'm glad two of those nations respect a right so fundamental as a right to death of owns own choosing and so do the great majority of its citizens (again according to polls). Where I'm from (Canada) we also legalized the right to die, and I'm comforted to know that should I have suffer from something like early-onset dementia, multiple sclerosis, tetraplegia, or whatever in the future; I have the right to die of my own choosing because I'm a mentally competent adult who can make such a decision.

To me such support comes naturally. I don't have any religious objections to it, and I believe in individual liberty, including a right to die. Do I think this right should be unlimited without any restrictions? Nope, and this goes for most of the freedoms I generally support. To the Christian community at large that's blasphemy because it believes that only god can take and end life. Death to me is not the worst of fates, and I value quality of life, independence and freedom far more than how long I live for until I die a natural death.