Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Catholic
Politics and Religion
Illinois’ Assisted Suicide Law is, yes, literally deadly

Illinois’ Assisted Suicide Law is, yes, literally deadly

Last updated on: August 14, 2026 at 7:53 pm by Jane the Actuary

0 Comments

Illinois’ Assisted Suicide Law is, yes, literally deadly 2026-08-14T19:53:01-06:00 Jane the Actuary

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

https://www.maxpixel.net/Disabled-Wheelchair-Vehicle-Disabled-Vehicle-798420

Cross-posted, with edits, from my “campaign” website due to the general nature of the topic.

When, last December, Governor Pritzker signed Rep. Grasse’s bill legalizing assisted suicide in Illinois, this is what the press release said:

To ensure the highest safeguards for patients, the law is effective in September of 2026, which affords participating health care providers and the Illinois Department of Public Health (IDPH) significant lead time to implement stringent processes and protections as outlined in the law.

September 12, the effective date, is fast approaching, but the IDPH has implemented no such “stringent processes and protections.” Only the bare text of the law will define how the process of securing the poison-so-called-medication will work, and that’s devastatingly deficient, both for those who will be at risk of coerced into suicide and those who care for the terminally ill and will be coerced into participating.

Two compelling lawsuits have been filed, one with caregiver-plaintiffs and the other by disabled people themselves, namely a quadriplegic woman, a woman with cerebral palsy, and multiple grassroots organizations of disabled people.

The core of the complaint by the disabled plaintiffs is that, absent true safeguards, ” people with life-threatening disabilities, as a discrete class, will be highly vulnerable to pressure from insurers and hospitals and even physicians to consent to the early loss of their lives.” Once the assisted suicide law is in effect, physicians will no longer have the “core ethical obligation to do no harm.”

Instead, the plaintiffs argue that they will be harmed because the law will place on them the burden to defend themselves against regular conversations by medical providers regarding suicide, and the vague parameters of the assisted suicide program are likely to mean that suicidal ideation will be encouraged rather than counseled against as for non-disabled people.

As the lawsuit states,

On September 12, 2026, when EOLA takes effect, the Defendant State and IDPH will operate a two-track system to respond to suicidal ideation, the traditional suicide prevention track, and alongside it, and only for persons with life-threatening disabilities, the state-sponsored assisted suicide track.

This is serious.

What’s worse, the lawsuit makes it clear that, although a provider is required to refer patients to mental health professionals in the case an assessment of decision-making capacity is needed, in line with the overall lack of clarifying rules, the law “does not provide any standards to guide providers in making this determination, nor does it require training in mental capacity assessment.”

Also, as it is, the law’s definition of “terminal disease” is vague about the matter of actual treatments for diseases, so that a great many conditions which require active medical or other care, including spinal cord injuries or even diabetes, would qualify as “terminal” based on the letter of the law, and in other jurisdictions, suicidal people have “created” a “terminal illness” for themselves by engaging in VSED, or voluntarily stopping eating and drinking. The law requires that doctors mention the existence of hospice and palliative care, but does not require that the state, alongside its creation of the assisted suicide law, actually provide/fund these alternatives.

And, finally, once a patient clears the (very low) bar for demonstrating they are not coerced, in order to obtain the drugs, there is no further documentation or even any witnesses required at the time of death, so that there is no protection against a patient later choosing against suicide but ultimate being compelled by family or caregivers.

The lawsuit by providers highlights serious issues as well, including some issues that you wouldn’t know simply from a general description of the law, but ways in which it interacts with other laws to cause far more harm.

The law formally declares that assisted suicide “is part of general medical care,” and declares that the provisions of the Health Care Right of Conscience Act (HCRCA) apply to the case of assisted suicide — and despite this law’s title, it doesn’t actually protect conscience rights. Instead, here’s the lawsuit’s explanation of those issues:

HCRCA mandates that health care facilities adopt protocols under which medical personnel “shall inform a patient of the . . . risks and benefits of” all their “treatment options in a timely manner, consistent with the current standards of medical practice or care”— even if the patient has not asked about a particular option.

In other words, healthcare professionals will be required to describe assisted suicide as one option among many, and to explicitly state the benefits of assisted suicide, which are by law defined to exist.

The providers also object to the requirement that they cannot prevent their employees or “individual practitioners” that they contract with, from promoting assisted suicide to the facility’s patients. Worse, the law’s prohibition of “misinformation” on assisted suicide is so vaguely defined as to put anti-assisted suicide doctors at risk of being penalized for trying to persuade patients not to commit suicide. As written, the law states that, by legal declaration, so-called “aid in dying” does not constitute suicide, so that a doctor could be professionally penalized for simply stating the plain fact that it is, in fact, suicide.

This is all bad news.

A doctor who objects to assisted suicide could have his or her license taken away and find $10,000 for each violation. Nursing homes which fail to discuss the “benefits” of assisted suicide could be deemed “abusive” and shut down. Hospitals, too, are at risk of penalties as severe as loss of operating license if they do not comply, since assisted suicide is now officially a part of the standard of care in Illinois.

And this all affects patients as well. If the law places doctors at risk if they fail to list assisted suicide as among the range of options once someone’s disease is deemed to be terminal, we are simply no longer talking about providing an option for a small group of people who seek it out.

Uncategorized

assisted suicide

Previous Post

July 12, 2026

Revising the "Disability [Pride] Flag"

Next Post

September 10, 2026 A September 11th Reflection

Recent Comments

0 | Leave a Comment

"Yup, Pretty sure that trans athletes are a major issue that needs to be decided ..."

E Brown

In which I comment on the ..."

"Do you pray to the golden calf, too? You seem like the type."

Rick

Is there a fix for gerrymandering?

"This includes our President, who according to all accounts doesn't read unless it's 1) small ..."

captcrisis

Are 28% of Americans truly functionally ..."

"For the test being digital vs paper, people do tend to do better with hard-copy, ..."

Bemused

Are 28% of Americans truly functionally ..."

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Actuarial/Retirement Issues Politics Uncategorized

Select a Month September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 December 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 August 2021 June 2021 April 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

How many chapters does Genesis have?

Select your answer to see how you score.

55 27 66 50