Swiss Assisted Suicide Clinic Founder Died By Assisted Suicide.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Minelli outside Dignitas

Emily Crane reported for the New York Post that Ludwig Minelli, the founder of the Dignitas assisted suicide clinic in Switzerland died by assisted suicide on November 29, 2025.

Minelli (93), was first a journalist and then a "human rights lawyer." Minelli had originally been an advisor to the Exit assisted suicide group but left Exit and founded Dignitas in 1998 because he wanted to be more strident.

Crane reported that:

Dignitas, which says it has strict guidelines for accepting candidates, has helped roughly 4,000 people in Switzerland and across the world end their lives, according to the group.

Lake Zurich urns.

Minelli was controversial for many reasons. Wikipedia reported that:

In a 2010 interview with The Atlantic magazine, Minelli admitted to depositing cremation urns containing the ashes of Dignitas members at Lake Zurich. A 2018 court case against Minelli focused on the circumstances surrounding the death of a woman who had bequeathed Dignitas 100,000 Swiss francs in her will. The organization had found the woman a fourth doctor who would prescribe drugs for assisted suicide after three doctors previously declined her request and the case accused him of profiteering from his clients.

Soraya Wernli

Soraya Wernli, a former employee of Dignitas, was featured in a Daily Mail article in February 2009 accusing Minelli of being obsessed with profit and not with dignity. Wernli claimed, in the Daily Mail article that:

‘just a few days into the job, he (Minelli) asked me to sort through the stuff in these plastic bin liners clogging the stairs.’ Minelli told her to ‘empty the sacks onto a long table ... and sort through everything.

In the sacks Wernli found - Mobile phones, handbags, ladies’ tights, shoes, spectacles, money, purses, wallets, jewels, and more.

Minelli had his “patients” sign forms saying the possessions were now the property of Dignitas. He then sold everything to pawn shops and second-hand shops.

Wernli, who was a nurse and a former care worker for elderly people worked for the Dignitas assisted suicide clinic in Zurich for 2½ years. During that time she came to believe that Dignitas was less about ethical euthanasia for the terminally ill and more of a money-making machine for Minelli.

The interview in The Atlantic Magazine in February 2010 also featured Soraya Wernli, who accused Minelli of ethical and financial improprieties and a lack of concern for vulnerable people.

More Lake Zurich urns

Minelli confirmed in The Atlantic interview that we was dumping the remains of people who died by assisted suicide in Lake Zurich. The article stated:

Minelli said he stores the urns until he has enough of them to load into his car. He then drives, usually at night, to a quiet spot on Lake Zurich, and tosses the remains into the water. Minelli insists that these burials are harmless but last year he was warned by Zurich’s water authority after they received complaints of human bone fragments washing up on shore.

BBC reporter, Imogen Foulkes published an investigative report on July 2, 2010 into Minelli and Dignitas. Foulkes reported:

Urns in Lake Zurich

The discovery of dozens of urns containing human ashes in Lake Zurich has served to focus attention once again on just what exactly assisted suicide groups are allowed to do.

It remains unclear who put the urns into the lake but there have been claims that Dignitas may have been involved: all the urns bore the label of the crematorium used by the organisation.

One German woman has come forward to say her stepmother's ashes were put in the lake by Dignitas, despite her wish to be buried next to her husband.

Foulkes commented on the Dignitas finances:

Dignitas has helped more than 1,000 people die in the past 12 years, (July 2010 report) many of them foreigners who come to Switzerland precisely because their own countries do not permit assisted suicide, Mr Minelli explained.

Each individual pays an initial membership fee, typically around $200 (£133), followed by annual membership fees of $80 (£53). Further fees for the consultation and the assisted suicide itself run to around $7,000 (£4,700).

When further asked about finances Mr Minelli refused to discuss the organisation's finances. Minelli stated:

"This is a private organisation," he explained. "Only the active members have a right to know the facts, and the public has no right at all. We are not working with public money, so there is no reason for us to answer questions."

Pietro D'Amico

In June 2013 I published an article about Pietro D’Amico, a 62-year-old magistrate from Calabria in Southern Italy, in who died by assisted suicide in April, 2013 after D'Amico received a wrong diagnosis. An article published in Switzerland's The Local, stated:

The father-of-one took the decision after a wrong diagnosis from Italian and Swiss doctors, his family's lawyer Michele Roccisano told Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera.

An autopsy carried out by the University of Basel’s Institute of Forensic Medicine found that D’Amico was not suffering from a life-threatening illness at the time of his death.

Roccisano has called on the Italian and Swiss authorities to examine D’Amico’s medical records to determine what went wrong.

In July 2013, a Swiss regional court found Dr. Philippe Freiburghaus “crossed the line” by assisting a suicide without obtaining a diagnosis.

On April 23, 2014, Dr Freiburghaus was acquitted for assisting a suicide without a diagnosis. The reasons for the acquittal were not made public.

Oriella Cazzanello

In February, 2014 the Daily Mail reported on Oriella Cazzanello, 85, who travelled to the assisted suicide clinic in Basel, Switzerland, where she paid €10,000 for an assisted suicide because she was unhappy about losing her looks. The article stated:

Cazzanello, who was in good mental and physical health, left her home in Arzignano, near Vicenza in northern Italy, without telling her relatives where she was going.

Her family, who had reported her to the police as missing, only learned of her death after they received her ashes and death certificate from the clinic.

Coffin leaving Dignitas

In 2017 Swissinfo.ch reported that the Swiss high court upheld the requirement that Dignitas must dispose all remains in cemeteries. Swissinfo.ch reported:

The grisly find in 2010 prompted the local authorities to draft new regulations five years later that outlawed the professional disposal of human remains in the canton. Dignitas fought the order, arguing that it represented an unfair restriction of trade. But both the Administrative Court and now the Supreme Court have sided with the canton.

The discovery of 67 urns in Lake Zurich, near to a Dignitas clinic, made international headlines seven years ago. The human remains were found by divers from the lake rescue service who were looking for a missing sunshade. 

A former Dignitas employee told the media that it was common to dump urns in the lake and estimated there to be around 300 in the watery grave. Dignitas denied the claims and Zurich prosecutors dropped a criminal probe after being unable to prove who had put the urns in the lake.

In May 2018 Minelli was charged with profiteering. 

Dignitas

There have been many controversial stories and deaths related to the Dignitas assisted suicide clinic. Dignitas claims to have assisted the suicides of more than 4000 people with the majority being "suicide tourists."

I will remembered Minelli as a serial killer, who primarily killed people with disabilities. Minelli took money from people with a death wish and killed them. He wasn't concerned about compassion, he was concerned with profit and killing.

Swiss Suicide Clinic Under Fire After Deaths Without Medical A Condition

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Article: Suicide clinics have many controversial deaths (Link).

Judith Hamilton, Alastair's mother.

Yahoo news reported the an article in People Magazine states that families of people who died at a Swiss suicide clinic are saying that their loved ones, who died, did not have a medical condition.

The article reports that Judith Hamilton, whose son died at the Pegasos suicide clinic stated that:

"It's like a business. If you have enough money, they offer you a service,”

The article reports on the death of Alistair Hamilton:

One notable case that received backlash involved Alastair Hamilton, a 47-year-old chemistry teacher with no serious or terminal illness. He traveled from London to end his life with Pegasos while his family believed he was going on a weekend vacation to Paris.

"He hugged me and said, 'I love you, Mum.' I didn't know it was his goodbye," his mother, Judith Hamilton, told RTS.

When Alastair stopped answering his phone and failed to return home, Judith reported him missing. She said she eventually found bank records that showed her son paid 12,000 Swiss francs (about $15,000) to Pegasos.

"It's like a business,” Judith claimed. “If you have enough money, they offer you a service.”

Pegasos was founded in 2019 and is available to adults over 18 who are of “sound mind” and have paid a fee. They offer assisted suicide “regardless of state of health,” which differs from other organizations that require patients to be terminally ill to end their lives.

To add to the grief, when Pegasus acknowledged Alistair's death they informed the family that his ashes were being sent in the mail. The article states:

Alastair’s brother Bradley told the outlet that they repeatedly emailed Pegasos after seeing the bank records but did not get a response. He alleged they were finally able to get a response from the clinic after involving the police and British embassy. At that point, Pegasos reportedly confirmed Alastair’s death and shared that his ashes would be sent to them in the mail.

A ITV news show found that Alastair admitted to Pegasus that he did not have a known medical condition but they assisted his suicide anyway:

Limited to 300 word answers, Alastair told them that his undiagnosed condition was causing him "pain, fatigue and discomfort" which had "devastated my life".

However, he admitted that "there is no current, definitive medical explanation" for his illness and that his family did not know he had decided to take his own life.

Despite that, Pegasos accepted his application and within several days of arriving in Switzerland he was helped to die.

Pegasos is not different than the other Swiss assisted suicide groups, they only appear more controversial because their business model is foreign suicides. Other Swiss suicide clinics, such as EXIT and Dignitas, that also focuses on foreign suicides, are also willing to kill people who are not dying.

The problem is assisted suicide. Allowing suicide businesses creates a profit for killing.

More articles:

• Euthanasia activist, Sean Davison arrested in death of a 79-year-old woman (Link). 
• A mother's warning about her son's death by assisted suicide in Switzerland (Link).

The assisted suicide lobby is promoting suicide tourism.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

A recent assisted suicide lobby information article asks the question: Can I travel to use Death with Dignity?

As many of our supporters are aware, Oregon and Vermont expanded their assisted suicide laws by removing the assisted suicide law residency requirement and allowing anyone from anywhere to die by assisted suicide in those states.

The recent assisted suicide lobby article is encouraging people from jurisdictions that prohibit assisted suicide to become suicide tourists and die by assisted suicide in Oregon or Vermont.

The article includes links for out-of-state- residents to contact assisted suicide organizations in Oregon and Vermont as well as contact information for a national organization that will provide advice for suicide tourists.

The assisted suicide lobby is promoting suicide tourism to encourage more out-of-state residents to die by assisted suicide in Oregon and Vermont.

In March 2025 I published an article outlining the Oregon assisted suicide statistics. In 2024 in Oregon there were:

• 607 poison prescriptions written, which was up from 433 in 2022.
• 376 reported assisted suicide deaths up by 71 from 305 in 2022.
• 23 of the 376 reported assisted suicide deaths were out-of-state residents.

In the article I explain that there were likely more assisted suicide deaths in Oregon in 2024 based on Oregon doctors often sending in late reports and possible problems with under-reporting.

Since the Oregon Health Authority (OHA) determines the number of assisted suicide deaths based on the reports they receive, therefore, if a doctor does not submit a report to the OHA there is no way to know if there was an out-of state assisted suicide death. As the 2024 OHA report states:

Previously, residence information was collected from the patient’s death certificate. However, for patients who die outside of Oregon and are not Oregon residents, OHA has no way to obtain notice of those deaths.

Since the OHA does not receive a death certificate for a non-resident assisted suicide death, therefore it cannot be determined if there were only 23 out-of-state residents who died by assisted suicide in Oregon in 2024.

It must be noted that the assisted suicide bill that passed in the New York state Assembly and Senate that has not been signed by New York Governor Kathy Hochul, does not have a residency requirement and would allow suicide tourism in New York.

When a person dies without family to take care of a funeral, the state becomes financially responsible for dealing with the body. Suicide tourism would exacerbate this problem.

Contact New York Governor Kathy Hochul (Contact Link) or call her at: 518-474-8390 and urge her to veto the assisted suicide bill and prevent assisted suicide tourism in New York.

Testimony of Dr Sharon Quick: In opposition to New York assisted suicide bill.

Testimony of Sharon Quick, MD, MA (Bioethics)

President, Physicians for Compassionate Care Education (PCCEF)

In opposition to New York A 136 June 8, 2024

I am President of Physicians for Compassionate Care Education Foundation (PCCEF), an organization without religious or political affiliation that advocates for the vulnerable at end of life. I have expertise in pediatric anesthesia, critical care, and medical ethics. We oppose A 136.

Summary: A 136, like other medically-assisted suicide laws, inevitably violates (rather than upholds) patient autonomy; creates (based on subjective, often inaccurate, criteria) a class of marginalized patients with the disability of terminal illness from whom the standard of medical care can be withheld; allows lethal drugs to unnecessarily substitute for good palliative care and pain control; disproportionately preys on those with mental health problems and disabilities; and destroys the foundation of medical ethics, creating distrust among patients and the health care profession. In addition, A 136 is the most radical policy in the country because it has no waiting period for obtaining lethal drugs.

1. Pain should never be a reason to seek lethal drugs. Complaints of excessive symptoms indicate doctors lack palliative care knowledge, such as when to refer to pain management specialists. Lethal drugs should never be a solution for lack of education. In addition, those in significant pain lack capacity to consent for lethal drugs. Instead, improve palliative care access and expertise, which has been assessed as likely insufficient to meet the needs of New York.(1) There is evidence that minorities, the uninsured, those on Medicaid, and those living in disadvantaged communities may encounter barriers to receiving palliative care.(2) It would be a tragedy for these under served populations if this legislation made lethal prescriptions more accessible than palliative care.

2. This bill has no waiting period to obtain lethal drugs; no other law is so rash. Immediate death does not give adequate time for appropriate discussion and interventions for vulnerable patients who make rash decisions out of fear, depression, embarrassment, subtle pressure by a tired caregiver who makes them feel like a burden, or other reversible or transient concerns. Such patients often change their minds and no longer want to hasten death. Terminal illness is highly associated with depression, and suicidal thinking is highest when cancer is first diagnosed and becomes less frequent as time goes on and patients get support.

3. Physicians may be wrong about a patient’s prognosis, and they often miss depression and compromised decision-making capacity. Patients in WA and OR have died up to 5 years beyond their original “terminal” diagnosis and receipt of lethal drugs. Neither mental health status nor capacity are required to be assessed immediately before a patient ingests lethal drugs, which could be years after initial assessment; there is no guarantee that patients are not compromised at that time. 

4. Lethal drugs are not a proportionate means of achieving palliative care goals but devalue vulnerable patients in a way that violates the very goals palliative care aims to achieve. Assisted suicide is abandonment, not health care, and is not part of palliative medicine. Lethal cocktails are bitter-tasting, sometimes mouth-burning liquids, and patients must ice their mouths with popsicles and take anti-emetics just to get them down. Risks include nausea, vomiting, aspiration, seizures, and not dying. Palliative care can do far better.

5. Lethal drug prescriptions undermine autonomy and discriminate against the disability community. Requests for lethal drugs are not primarily for pain but because of concerns of losing autonomy or abilities or feeling like a burden. These may be symptoms of depression and are usually psychological responses to disabilities developed during terminal illness--which is itself a disability by both social security and ADA criteria. This bill grants new choices and power to health practitioners, not patients, allowing them to treat patients unequally, subjectively placing them into either (1) a protected group (getting standard mental health care) or (2) a marginalized group with the disability of terminal illness (who can be abandoned to lethal drugs). This discriminates against the disability community and undermines autonomy by violating equality of persons. New York does not need a two-tiered health system that devalues those with the disability of terminal illness. 

6. The slippery slope is real. Patients with depression and those with non-terminal diagnoses of anorexia, hernia, arthritis, and “medical complications” have received lethal drugs. Hundreds of doctors’ and patients’ consent forms are missing in Washington and Colorado.

a. In 2023, a dementia diagnosis led Cody Sontag to voluntarily stopping eating and drinking (called VSED) to kill herself. An Oregon doctor said dehydration from VSED would soon cause death; he waived the waiting period, prescribed lethal drugs, and Cody died from them.(3) Dehydration is not “incurable” or “irreversible,” as legally required. How many others with non-terminal diagnoses have used VSED to access lethal drugs? No one—least of all physicians whom the vulnerable must be able to trust—should be granted god-like powers to decide which disabilities make life worthless, prey on those who lack capacity, and assist with termination of those so judged.

7. There is no mechanism to enforce the law or detect abuse, which is perhaps why no sanctions have been reported. The design of this bill, like other assisted suicide laws, is a set-up for undetected elder abuse, coercion, or murder, given neither capacity re-evaluation nor the presence a neutral party are required when patients ingest lethal drugs (sometimes weeks, months, or years after initial evaluation).

8. Doctors often devalue those with disabilities. Protect the medical profession from acting on that bias by not granting them power to assist the suicides of patients disabled by terminal illness—especially a law with so little oversight that physicians are not disciplined for ending the lives of those with non-terminal illness (like Cody).

9. Protect the medical profession from distrust, both between patients and their doctors and among doctors. Patients in the northwest who are opposed to assisted suicide now have legitimate fears that doctors might overlook depression or compromised capacity, devalue them, and prescribe lethal drugs if they request hastened death while depressed or in a moment of vulnerable weakness. A death request is often a plea for help, and people often change their minds about hastening death with time, treatment, and support. Dr. Bentz lost trust in colleagues after referring a patient to an oncologist who, over Dr. Bentz’ objections, gave lethal drugs to his patient instead of treating his depression.

10. This bill contains potential conscience violations for physicians and health care employers:

a. Requires falsifying the death certificate, naming the underlying disease as the cause, rather than the actual cause of death—lethal drugs (p. 12, lines 12-14)
b. It is unclear whether an objecting health care employer can prohibit physician employees from providing information about lethal drug provision or referring patients for them, both of which would violate their conscience as participation in an unethical practice that is not medical care.
c. It is unclear whether objecting physicians could be forced to inform or refer for this process in violation of their conscience.

11. Finally, participants do not need to be New York residents, which may allow out-of-state residents to obtain lethal drugs. These participants may not receive adequate evaluation, especially of capacity and lack of coercion, by New York physicians who may not know them well. Because non-residents would be forced to take the lethal drugs in New York, it may pressure patients to take the lethal drugs immediately, when many patients hold on to the drugs for weeks, months, and even years, and some decide never to take them. Given the number of people who travel to New York from around the world, this may make New York an international assisted suicide tourism destination.

Please vote no on A 136. I am happy to answer any questions you may have.

Sincerely,
Sharon Quick, MD, MA (Bioethics)
President, Physicians for Compassionate Care Education Foundation (PCCEF)

1. CAPC. Palliative Care in New York. 2025. (Link).
2. Chambers B. How to Increase Awareness and Reduce Gaps in Palliative Care for Minorities July 9, 2020. (Link) (accessed 9-22-2024).
3. Pope TM, Brodoff L. Medical aid in dying to avoid late-stage dementia. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 2024: 1-7. (Link).

Swiss canton cuts a deal with suicide group.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

An article by Marc Leutenegger that was published by Swissinfo.ch on February 21, 2025 states that the Swiss Canton Solothurn has cut a deal with the Pegasus assisted suicide group that will save money for the Canton by eliminating the need for the authorities to send a legal and medical team to investigate the death. Leutenegger reported that:

..the core of an agreement, unprecedented in Switzerland, that was signed late last year between canton Solothurn and the right-to-die organisation Pegasos. Under the new arrangement, if Pegasos provides video evidence that the suicide was carried out by the person themselves, as well as additional information, then the authorities do not send in a legal and medical team to investigate the death.

The agreement will make it easier for Pegasos and reduce the cost for the Canton. Leutenegger reported:

This reduces the costs of the post-mortem investigation to between CHF1,000 ($1,110) and CHF2,000 per case. What is more, the bill is paid by the right-to-die organisation, and therefore ultimately by the person who wanted to die.

According to Pegasos, the costs are subsumed in the total price of assisted suicide, which amounts to around CHF10,000 per person, be it with Pegasos or other, similar organisations in Switzerland.

According to Pegasos, the agreement above all helps to ensure a more dignified setting for the relatives. The farewell and grieving process is now no longer interrupted by the appearance of the criminal investigation team, the organisation wrote in response to a request. “This disturbed the family’s privacy in an intimate moment. Family and friends had to wait until the official procedures were completed.”

This agreement reduces the cost for the Canton with relation to assisted suicide. Leutenegger reports:

Thanks to the agreement, which came into effect in December, canton Solothurn can cut some high costs. Previously, each assisted suicide by a person resident abroad cost the canton around CHF3,000.

“We get a better result in terms of evidence in this way. The new arrangement also eases the burden on the public purse and on human resources,” says Solothurn’s chief prosecutor, Hansjürg Brodbeck. The authorities, meanwhile, reserve the right to carry out random checks.

It is expected that the number of assisted suicide deaths will double by 2035. Leutenegger wrote;

Lately, over 1,700 Swiss residents a year have committed assisted suicide. In addition, over 500 people from abroad travel to Switzerland for this purpose each year. And demand is increasing: observers expect the number of assisted suicides in Switzerland to double by 2035.

More information on the Switzerlands assisted suicide law.

• Swiss assisted suicide clinic's many controversial deaths (Link). 
• Euthanasia activist, Sean Davison, arrested in London England (Link).
• A mother's warning about her sons death by assisted suicide in Switzerland (Link). 
• My husbands death made me more opposed to assisted suicide (Link). 
• Swiss study: Legalizing assisted suicide does not lessen the number of common suicides (Link).

New Jersey court decision prevents suicide tourism and all of it's grisly reality

By Dr Jacqueline Abernathy

Article: Judge upholds New Jersey assisted suicide law residency requirement (Link). 

Jacqueline Abernathy

Vulnerable citizens, disability rights advocates and people who oppose assisted suicide were delivered good news last week when the latest attempt at judicial activism by the assisted suicide lobby failed to strike down the residency requirement in New Jersey’s assisted suicide law. Compassion & Choices has been trying to chip away at the supposed safeguards in the state legislation and has, for years, pinned its hopes on litigation that could persuade judges to circumvent the will of the people. This latest attempt failed otherwise New Jersey would have joined Oregon and Vermont as the third suicide tourist destination in the United States.

Once an assisted suicide law is passed and the practice is legalized, safeguards like residency requirements, eligibility, provider qualifications, and waiting periods become the next target for advocates. Colorado just passed Bill SB 128 expanding their assisted suicide law to lower the waiting period and allow non-physicians to prescribe lethal poison drugs. However, the first draft of that bill would have revoked the residency requirement and reduced the waiting period from 2 weeks to only 2 days. The legislators compromised on cutting the waiting period to one week, however, embracing suicide tourism was a harder sell. I testified that the reason for such an abbreviated waiting period and liberalized qualifications on who could legally assist suicides was to accommodate non-residents who would be eligible to end their lives in Colorado. Expanding the law was the goal but the ultimate desire for euthanasia advocates was that assisted suicide be accessible to sick and dying people in neighboring states where their lives are protected from legal violence. When someone takes a moment to consider the pragmatic and grizzly reality of what that means for society, not just ill people and their loved ones but others who have to clean up the aftermath, it should become evident why selling suicide is a faulty and grisly idea.

Just from a patient's rights perspective, allowing vulnerable people to access lethal poison from a total stranger who will only have them as a patient as long as it takes to dispense the lethal dose is bad medicine even if we weren't talking about an irrevocable destruction. Healthcare providers are supposed to take into consideration the confluence of a patient's situation including the validity of someone's terminal diagnosis, treatment options, the patient's mental capacity to consent, the possibility of treatable depression, and other circumstances that can be resolved, and potential coercion, real or just perceived. A patient could be under pressure not to spend some heirs' inheritance or believe that there would be no one to take care of them if their family isn't willing. Or, someone might just assume this and be gravely incorrect. The family might desperately want as much time with them as possible and the ability to support them in their difficult time.

Likewise, someone hiding their intent to be killed may choose to do so alone also risks dying in a less palatable way. Assisted suicide drugs often include an anti-emetic to deal with the nauseating nature of the barbiturate overdose and it is not uncommon for people to vomit after taking the poison. There's a risk of asphyxiation on one's own vomit or not ingesting sufficient doses of poison to fully overdose. What about those victims whose death is delayed? When the process takes longer, those who do not die as quickly as expected risk having the process interrupted. Someone choosing to take the dose in time to avoid rigor mortis or gruesome post-mortem decay before a visitor finds them the next morning might not yet be dead when their friend or housekeeper arrives. Even if there was a note, people may call an ambulance in a panic, and unlike do not resuscitate orders, paramedics and hospital staff intervene "full code." The hastiness and secrecy of travelling out of state to be killed enables these tragedies.

Making suicide into a business is really bad medicine (as if killing were healthcare, to begin with), but adding the ethical conflict of financial gain is a significant concern with suicide tourism. Suicide tourism fosters specialty death clinics by creating a market for suicide as a service, niche practices staffed by unethical, unscrupulous doctors or zealots who are ideologically pro-euthanasia who believe death on demand is a personal right for those who meet any legal criteria. There is no second opinion. Visiting a doctor once, specifically because they sell suicide suggests no doctor-patient relationship, and furthermore, with a doctor who has a conflict of interest: a profit motive against critically assessing each patient's situation to determine if they truly want to end their lives, if they are guided by wrong assumptions or ignorance of non-violent options, and if there are treatment alternatives they haven't considered. It's counterproductive for somebody who runs a business selling suicide to risk losing future customers by being the doctor who can't be counted on to just hand over the script on demand like a vending machine.

People do not pay huge sums to travel to a clinic that prescribes lethal poison without the assurance that they will get that prescription when they arrive. People are less likely to endure the expense and trouble of travelling to an assisted suicide-sympathetic practice if they may be turned away. Rather, it is just rational to go to a clinic that has a reputation for rubber-stamping requests and so other clinics are pressured to do the same merely to stay competitive. Suicide tourism fosters specialty death clinics by creating a market for suicide as a service, niche practices staffed by unethical, unscrupulous doctors or zealots who are ideologically pro-euthanasia who believe death on demand is a personal right for those who meet any legal criteria. There is no second opinion.

As for loved ones, the secrecy that this allows and the ability to end a life while alone is rife with the potential for lifelong guilt and regret from family members who might wish they had been there to hold their loved one’s hand, others would have given anything to assure them that they don't have to die this way. Imagine blaming yourself for not being supportive enough, acting greedy or selfish that someone you loved died because they thought you valued their money that they stand to inherit more than you valued their life. I can't fathom the shame I would feel if my grandparents, parents, siblings or spouse didn't think I would be there when they needed me, and worse, knowing they died with that misperception without me ever having the chance to redeem myself.

Imagine the added trauma of just stumbling across your loved one's dead body the day after having met them for brunch, when they were very alive and nowhere close to naturally succumbing to their underlying illness. It is possible that some people would rather just run off to kill themselves in isolation rather than return home with their dose, launching a panic and an anxiety-laced search for them, creating pointless emotional agony from the search effort, an agony which will not end in relief, just further anguish. A suicide how-to manual in Japan caters to anyone who just wants to disappear completely. It provides bus routes to the dense Aokigahara forest, so someone can kill themselves where their body is unlikely to ever be found (it even offers pointers for how to avoid suspicion from park staff, trained to spot people suicidal people in crisis). Some people may choose suicide tourist states as their final destination in order to hide from their family and friends. Maybe they do not want the shame of having anyone know they died by assisted suicide or think that it is easier for their family not to know they died in this manner. Whatever the motive for secretly seeking assisted suicide, it complicates the grief of those left behind. Losing a loved one is inherently painful. Suicide tourism serves to only add layer upon layer of additional torment and trauma.

For the average citizen of a suicide tourist destination, there is the added risk of the heavy emotional and financial toll from cleaning up after the deceased. While it is true that most suicides (77%) occur at home, those who travel from their homes out-of-state just to obtain deadly drugs might not return home. Those who seek suicide away from home are first and foremost trying to subvert the laws of their home jurisdiction but again, how many might be trying to subvert loved ones back home as well? As mentioned before: some people just do not want to die where they could be found. Furthermore, what about those suicide-seekers with no one to return home to anyway or those who can not afford return travel? Suicide is an inherently impulsive act and someone might be unwilling or afraid to wait. Perhaps some are unable to afford return travel or prefer to spend their money to die in an Airbnb with a scenic view of nature.

There are suicide hotspots for a reason Parks attract despondent people not just because some just want to "return to nature" when they die. National parks are prime suicide destinations in the United States suicide is the second leading cause of death among visitors and deaths can cost over a quarter-million dollars in recovery and identification efforts per victim. Park Rangers have suffered immense psychological damage from these macabre discoveries. We know that the mere proximity to suicide violence increases the likelihood of suicide among those who experienced it, primarily the survivors but even strangers like first responders. It could also be the hotel maid or the owner of an Airbnb who endures the terror of discovering a tourist cold and breathless in their bed. Because pills are easier to conceal than guns or ropes and are inconspicuous any public place can become the spot someone chooses to die if they are inclined, where anyone can become a victim of finding their corpse.

These are merely a few hypothetical pitfalls of turning death into a tourist attraction. Assisted suicide itself is already wrought with abuses and anguish but allowing clinics to sell it as a commodity to patients they know nothing about (and patients they have no intention of getting to know) is a compounding public health and safety risk.

The people of New Jersey as well as neighboring states who would have availed themselves of out-of-state suicide are fortunate that the court opted to protect them. Even though the reasons for denying the petition were more procedural, the logistical issues of liability from the decedents' home states, the effect is the same: vulnerable people from neighboring states are protected by the laws enacted to keep them safe, at least for now.

Judge upholds New Jersey assisted suicide law resident requirement.

Alex Schadenberg

Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Dana DiFilippo reported for the New Jersey Monitor on September 19, 2024 that U.S. District Court Judge Renée Marie Bumb upheld the New Jersey assisted suicide law residency requirement.

Judge Bumb dismissed the case by the assisted suicide lobby and two plaintiffs who were challenging the right of New Jersey to restrict their assisted suicide law to state residents. DiFilippo reported:

A federal judge has refused to strike down the residency requirement in New Jersey’s physician-assisted suicide law, a court loss advocates declared “a temporary roadblock.”

U.S. District Court Judge Renée Marie Bumb on Wednesday dismissed a lawsuit by two terminally ill women from Pennsylvania and Delaware, rejecting their claim that the residency requirement in New Jersey’s Medical Aid in Dying for the Terminally Ill Act is unconstitutional.

Judge Bumb refused to block enforcement of the residency requirement and stated:

“The residence requirement makes sense: While medical aid in dying is permitted in New Jersey, it is indistinguishable from the criminal act of assisted suicide in neighboring states,” 

“By limiting the pool of eligible patients to State residents, the requirement is rationally related to the legitimate objective of protecting from out-of-state liability providers and advocates who assist terminally ill patients in seeking medical aid in dying.”

The fact that the assisted suicide lobby considers the decision to be a "temporary roadblock" indicates that they intend to continue pressuring New Jersey to expand their assisted suicide law.

In October 2021, the assisted suicide lobby group, Compassion and Choices, and Dr Nicholas Gideonse, an assisted suicide doctor, launched a court case challenging the Oregon assisted suicide residency requirement. Instead of defending the residency requirement, the Oregon Government, on March 29, 2022 agreed to remove the residency requirement.

A February 2023 article by James Reinl for the Daily Mail reported that Dr Nicholas Gideonse has opened the first assisted suicide clinic in Oregon to prescribe lethal assisted suicide drugs for death tourists. At least one person from Texas and an east coast resident has died by assisted suicide in Oregon.

In August, 2022, Compassion and Choices launched a lawsuit on behalf of a Connecticut woman and a Vermont doctor challenging Vermont's assisted suicide residency requirement.

Withdrawing the assisted suicide law residency requirement allows for assisted suicide tourism. Every American is eligible to die by assisted suicide in the states of Oregon and Vermont.

The New Jersey 2023 assisted suicide report states that there were 101 reported assisted suicide deaths in 2023 up from 91 in 2022. Assisted suicide started in New Jersey on April 12, 2019.

More than 100 died by assisted suicide in New Jersey in 2023.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

The New Jersey 2023 assisted suicide report states that there were 101 reported assisted suicide deaths in 2023 up from 91 in 2022. Assisted suicide started in New Jersey on April 12, 2019.

According to the report:

• 101 people were known to have died by assisted suicide, 
• 13 people received the lethal poison but died a natural death, 
• 3 people received the lethal poison but had not died and 
• 2 people received the lethal poison and died but the cause of death is unknown.

When the cause of death is unknown, it usually means that no report was submitted. Therefore it may have been an assisted suicide death, but no report was filed.

The assisted suicide lobby is pressuring the New Jersey government to waive the 15-day waiting period and remove the residency requirement. The waiting period protects people from dying at a low point in their life while the residency requirement prevents the state from becoming a suicide tourist destination.

Similar to other jurisdictions, the most common reason for approving death by assisted suicide is cancer (62%). In New Jersey only 3% of the deaths were for "other reasons." The New Jersey report does not indicate what conditions constituted "other reasons" but in some states "other reasons" included diabetes or eating disorders.

Nine different experimental lethal poison cocktails were used in 2022. In 2023, 4 different lethal poison cocktails were used with 96 of 101 people dying by the lethal poison cocktail: “Morphine, Diazepam, Phenobarbital, Amitriptyline, Digoxin, Zofran and Reglan”.

The New Jersey report does not include information about complications, length of relationship with the physician, time between first request and ingestion of the lethal dose, time between ingestion of the lethal dose and unconsciousness or time between ingestion of the lethal dose and death.

The report implies that the deaths were voluntary (self-administered), but the information in the report does not address that subject.

Pressure to expand New Jersey assisted suicide law.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Dana Difilippo reported for the New Jersey Monitor on August 28, 2024 that the assisted suicide lobby is pressuring the New Jersey government to expand their assisted suicide law. Difilippo reports:

Since New Jersey lawmakers passed an aid-in-dying law five years ago, the number of terminally ill patients who have sought to end their lives by self-administered medication has jumped almost tenfold.

Now, advocates are working on two fronts to push state policymakers to “course-correct” the law and make it more accessible to people nearing death with unbearable pain and suffering.

They want to abolish a provision in the law that restricts it to New Jersey residents. Two terminally ill patients from Delaware and Pennsylvania and two New Jersey doctors sued the state last summer, calling the residency restriction discriminatory and unconstitutional.

They also want state legislators to move on a stalled bill that would allow doctors to waive the mandatory 15-day waiting period after patients’ initial requests for life-ending medication. The wait was meant as a safeguard but instead has become a barrier, supporters say.

As I have written in previous articles, nearly every US State that has legalized assisted suicide later expanded their law (Link to article).

According to Difilippo the assisted suicide lobby is pressuring the New Jersey government to waive the waiting period and remove the residency requirement. The waiting period protects people from dying at the low point in their life while the residency requirement prevents the state from becoming a suicide tourist destination. 

Difilippo reports that assisted suicide deaths have grown steadily in New Jersey:

In the past five years, doctors in New Jersey have evaluated and approved almost 300 people to end their lives by self-administering prescribed medication, with the number steadily climbing from 12 in 2019 to 101 last year, according to the Office of the Chief State Medical Examiner.

Herb Conaway Jr (D-Burlington) who has sponsored the bill to expand the New Jersey assisted suicide law admits that assisted suicide laws will expand over time. Difilippo reports:

“Most laws need to be adjusted at one point or another, driven by the data that we accumulate in the wake of the initial passage,” Conaway said.

Difilippo reported that Corinne Carey, the Senior campaign director for the assisted suicide lobby stated:

Most states that have legalized aid-in-dying used Oregon’s law as their blueprint, but the waiting period is a “remnant” of that pioneering law that many have since eliminated, Carey said.

The assisted suicide lobby launched a lawsuit to remove the New Jersey state assisted suicide residency requirement.

Last August, two terminally ill women from neighboring states filed a federal lawsuit looking to end New Jersey’s residency requirement for aid-in-dying.

Plaintiffs Judith Govatos, a Wilmington, Delaware, resident with stage-4 lymphoma, and Andy Sealy, a Philadelphia resident with metastatic breast cancer, wanted to apply for life-ending medication under New Jersey’s law but couldn’t because of the residency requirement, according to the complaint.

Pasik, founder of New Jersey Death with Dignity, and Dr. Paul Bryman, a geriatrician and medical director of a Camden County hospice, joined as plaintiffs, saying the requirement prevents them from treating out-of-state patients because of potential criminal or civil liability.

Attorney General Matt Platkin asked a judge in January to dismiss the case. There has been no ruling on that motion.

Unlike Oregon and Vermont that withdrew their state assisted suicide residency requirement after the assisted suicide lobby challenged it in court, New Jersey Attorney General Platkin is defending the assisted suicide residency requirement.

Swiss suicide clinic's many controversial deaths.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Ronny Reyes and Joe Hutchinson and Rory Tingle published an article in the Daily Mail on Sunday July 7 concerning some of the controversial deaths that have happened at a suicide clinic in Switzerland. Since I not want to promote the suicide clinic, I am not stating the name of the clinic.

Catherine Kassenoff in happier times.

Possibly the most controversial death was a New York woman who claimed to have gone to die at the suicide clinic to punish her estranged husband. The authors wrote:

Catherine Kassenoff, from Westchester in New York State, traveled to Basel last May to take her life at the ... which charges $11,000 (£8,600) for what it advertises as death with minimal 'bureaucracy'. 

The 54-year-old lawyer claimed her husband, Alan, had been abusing her and their children for years, and that it led to her taking her own life amid their custody battle, although Mr Kassenoff has denied being abusive.

Alastair Hamilton's mother.

The authors continued:

Among the hundreds who ended their lives there last year was British chemistry teacher Alastair Hamilton, who took a lethal overdose of drugs without telling his family and had no discernable illness, and two American sisters who had become 'tired' of life.

The authors tell the story of Hamilton's death:

The Hamilton family only learned Alastair had taken his life at the clinic after police examined his bank account statements and found that he had transferred thousands of pounds to ... leading his mother Judith to brand it a 'cowboy clinic'. 

Mr Hamilton told his parents he was visiting a friend in Paris when instead he was flying to Basel in Switzerland to end his life.

Shockingly, it took the persistence of Mr Hamilton's devastated family, the Metropolitan Police, the Foreign Office and Interpol to discover what had happened to Alastair after he vanished last summer.

In emails to Alastair's family, a frustrated Met Police sergeant criticised ... 'lack of compassion and lack of transparency' as 'completely unacceptable'. The clinic later vowed to change its procedures to ensure that relatives were always informed in future.

Ammouri Sisters

The authors then write about the deaths of two American sisters who were "tired of life".

In another controversial case, American sisters Ammouri and Susan Frazier decided to die at ... in 2022 because they had become 'tired of life'.  

Dr Ammouri, a 54-year-old palliative care doctor, and Ms Frazier, 49, had been suffering from medical 'frustrations' including chronic insomnia, vertigo and back pain, a doctor they consulted told The Independent. 

Their grieving brother, Ammouri Ammouri, said he wanted answers over their deaths, telling the New York Post:  'They were so secretive, especially with me.

'Can someone tell me what happened? Do people snap just like that? It could be. You wake up one day and you don't feel like life is precious.'

Laura Henkel

The authors describe the suicide clinic and then continue by writing about the death of Laura Henkel:

Laura Henkel, an Australian woman who allowed her filmmaker daughter to record her final moments at ...was seen laying on the death room's bed during her final moments in December 2019.

She opted for death via intravenous injection, which can be seen beside her bed in an image from the documentary.

Henkel had just turned 90, was not suffering from any terminal illness, and said she was mentally and physically healthy for her age.

But she said she wanted to decide to die on her own terms, before suffering the type of illness commonly associated with very old age that could have prevented her from being able to make that decision.

Henkel traveled to Switzerland because assisted dying was illegal in her home country of Australia.

The article explains that the suicide clinic requires the person to become a member, which costs $110 and then they charge $11,000 for the suicide. From other articles that I have read, they have other death services that are an option that will increase the cost of the suicide.

The authors explain that David Goodall died at the Swiss suicide clinic at the age of 104. Goodall was not sick, but he claimed that he was not well. 

The David Goodall story suggests that elderly people should die at a certain age. During his press conference Goodall was wearing a sweater that stated - ageing disgracefully. The message that some lives are not worth living has eugenic overtones even when it is promoted by someone who is seeking death.

The authors then dig deeper into the story of Catherine Kassenoff. They write:

Catherine Kassenoff travelled to ... in May last year after announcing on Facebook that she was 'ending my own life'.

She had claimed her husband Allan Kassenoff had been abusing her and their children for years, and that it led to her taking her own life.

Allan was given sole custody of their three daughters, with his wife opting to kill herself after she lost visitation rights and being diagnosed with terminal cancer.

New details have since emerged about her suicide, as well as claims from former nannies that Catherine had punished her own adopted daughter by 'dripping water' on her all day so she couldn't sleep. 

She is accused of treating her other daughters who were later born via IVF in a much kinder way.

As part of her Facebook post, Catherine also released thousands of court documents, alongside videos of her husband, in a now defunct Dropbox link.

One of the reports seen by the outlet that was released was written by UK based former psychiatrist Colin Brewer.

Brewer had written in his report for the ... that Catherine was of a 'sound enough mind' to end her life.

Catherine Kassenoff's husband Alan was forced to quit his job as a lawyer following a leave of absence in June, because TikToker Robbie Harvey, an advocate for women in abusive relationships, started uploading videos Catherine had shared on her Facebook.

Her videos were removed but her claims were circulated online and among over 3 million of his followers.

Along with the details of their nasty legal woes and his alleged abuse, Catherine shared videos of Kassenoff throwing tantrums and calling her a 'fat, old loser.'

In another video, he was heard berating the mom-of-three, saying he hated her.

Other clips show him allegedly screaming behind doors, yelling at his kids to 'shut up,' and dramatically leaving their home and refusing to take care of the children that remain in his custody.

Meanwhile, a video of one of their daughters reveals the young girl crying and saying she doesn't 'want to go with that crazy guy.'

The harm done to the family when suicide becomes a weapon of revenge.

Kasenoff sued Harvey last year for him sharing the clips, claiming they led to financial and emotional ruin.

'With a few clicks of his keyboard and a video uploaded to TikTok, Defendant Robert Harvey financially destroyed Plaintiff Allan Kassenoff,' his attorneys wrote in the filing.

'And, even worse, irreparably harmed Mr. Kassenoff's three young children… by forcing them into a life where their identities will forever be associated with a bitter and ugly divorce and the suicide of their mother.'

The lawsuit claims that Harvey's followers 'bombarded' the law firm with more than 7,000 calls and 500 emails accusing him of being the reason Catherine took her life.

Allan had sought out $150m (£117m) to compensate him for his loss of earnings and his 'destroyed reputation. They settled earlier this week for an undisclosed sum.

Euthanasia, assisted suicide, suicide are never good for people or their families. Even in the "worst case" scenario, euthanasia and assisted suicide represent a cultural and medical abandonment of people.

Traditionally, nearly everyone in society opposed killing. Now it has not only become acceptable to kill but in fact society is covering up the reality of killing by further selling the concept to people who do not fit the "typical" case.

Now the pro-death lobby denies the reality that there is a type of push based on a justification of killing. For instance, in Canada most major hospitals have a "MAiD" (euthanasia) team. These teams not only provide euthanasia (kill their patients) they sell euthanasia by asking people who are in the hospital if they want MAiD.

This story clarifies what we have always known. The culture needs to care not kill.