Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, flanked by Illinois Senate President Don Harmon, left, and House Speaker Emanuel "Chris" Welch, right
CHICAGO — People with severe physical disabilities and a group of disability rights advocates have sued the state of Illinois over the passage of the state's legalization of medical assisted suicide, saying the measure should be struck down because it violates federal disability rights protections by granting doctors, health insurers and others the power to pressure those who are severely disabled to kill themselves, rather than continue to live as an expensive "burden."
The lawsuit was filed on June 11 in Chicago federal court.
Plaintiffs in the action include disability rights advocacy groups, the National Council on Independent Living, Not Dead Yet, the Institute for Patients' Rights, Progress Center for Independent Living and Chicago Adapt.
Medical group the United Spinal Association is also a named plaintiff.
Individuals named as plaintiffs in the action include: Ebony Payne, who is identified as a quadripalegic and a resident of Illinois; Pam Heavens, who is identified as an Illinois citizen with cerebral palsy who relies upon a motorized wheelchair; and Dr. Nooshig Luz Salvador, an Illinois physician whose "practice includes treating people with disabilities."
The lawsuit specifically urges a federal judge to block the state from moving forward with a recently enacted law legalizing physician-assisted suicide, which the state has called "medical assistance in dying," or "MAiD."
The law, titled by lawmakers as the Illinois End of Life Options Act (EOLA), was passed by the state's Democratic governing supermajority over Republican opposition this spring. It was signed into law by Democrat Gov. JB Pritzker.
The law is scheduled to take effect Sept. 12.
Supporters of the law, including Pritzker, have said the law is needed to provide people with terminal illnesses with "the option to seek medication to peacefully end their lives on their own terms in consultation with physicians."
When he signed the bill into law, Pritzker said the law would enable "patients faced with debilitating terminal illnesses to make a decision, in consultation with a doctor, that helps them avoid unnecessary pain and suffering at the end of their lives."
In their lawsuit, however, the plaintiffs with disabilities and their allied advocate co-plaintiffs said the law will upend longstanding legal protections for people with disabilities and completely alter their relationships with their doctors.
They asserted the new regime amounts to state permission for doctors, insurers and other "private actors" to pressure those with severe disabilities to die early as a cost- and labor-saving measure.
They noted the law particularly ends a presumption by those with disabilities that their doctors remain committed to the millennia-old "ethical obligation to do no harm."
"EOLA instead substitutes a new medical standard allowing doctors to prescribe lethal drugs for the specific purpose of helping their patients die by suicide," the lawsuit says. "EOLA embarks on this reckless experiment with no guardrails and no adequate legal framework to prevent the erroneous taking of life.
"Without any such safeguards, or objective parameters for eligibility, there will be an inevitable evolution from EOLA's 'right to die' to a 'duty to die' for individuals whose disabilities are a costly burden or who lack the resources for extended medical care.
"Under EOLA, 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."
Further, the lawsuit asserts the Illinois assisted suicide law will lead to a shift in how the state handles suicide prevention, particularly for those with disabilities. While to this point, the state has dedicated resources to the single message of preventing suicide and providing help to those with suicidal ideation, the lawsuit asserts that the new law will in essence create a double standard.
Now, they warn, the state will evaluate its willingness to help prevent suicide in those with disabilities against the quality of life considerations inherent to a MAiD regime.
All Illinois residents "who have life-threatening disabilities are immediately subject to a two-track state system to respond to suicidal ideation — one to save lives, and another, only for persons with life-threatening disabilities, to facilitate their deaths," the lawsuit says.
The lawsuit seeks a court order declaring the Illinois law in violation of the federal Americans with Disabilities Act and other civil rights laws.
It also asserts the state law will violate the due process protections of the Fourteenth Amendment, by improperly delegating the power to decide if a person lives or dies from the state to "private actors," and doing so without providing any opportunity for a hearing to decide if the life-and-death decision is proper and justified.
The plaintiffs are represented in the action by attorney Thomas H. Geoghegan, and others with the firms of Despres Schwartz & Geoghegan, of Chicago; and Rosen Bien Galvan & Grunfeld, of San Francisco.
