Disability and patient advocacy groups filed a lawsuit on December 8 in the U.S. District Court in Delaware. The lawsuit alleges that Delaware's new physician-assisted suicide law discriminates against people with disabilities. Delaware passed the bill in May 2025, legalizing physician-assisted suicide for terminally ill adults with a prognosis of six months or less. The law, effective January 1, 2026, permits patients to self-administer lethal medication. The complaint claims the new law violates both Delaware and federal constitutional law.
6 days ago
Disability and patient advocacy groups filed a lawsuit on December 8, 2025, in the U.S. District Court in Delaware against the state's new physician-assisted suicide law.1
The 74-page complaint names Gov. Matthew Meyer and the Delaware Department of Health and Human Services as defendants, alleging the law discriminates against people with disabilities.1
Delaware passed the bill in May 2025, legalizing physician-assisted suicide for terminally ill adults with a prognosis of six months or less to live.1
The law takes effect on January 1, 2026, allowing patients to self-administer lethal medication.1
The lawsuit claims the law violates the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause, and other federal and state protections.1
It argues that people with life-threatening disabilities face imminent risk, as the law promotes suicide assistance over prevention for them.1
Critics highlight the absence of mandatory mental health screenings for depression or other conditions, undermining informed consent.1
Plaintiffs include the Institute for Patients’ Rights, The Freedom Center for Independent Living, Delaware ADAPT, Not Dead Yet, United Spinal Association, the National Council on Independent Living, and advocate Sean Curran.1
Sean Curran, a quadriplegic with a 36-year spinal cord injury, called the law "repugnant," stating it devalues disabled lives and prioritizes suicide help over prevention.1
Daniese McMullin-Powell, a polio survivor using a wheelchair, warned that the law exacerbates medical neglect and risks deadly discrimination from doctors and insurers based on perceived quality of life.1
The complaint describes a national trend directing disabled individuals toward suicide amid federal healthcare cuts, labeling it "discrimination plain and simple."1
Ted Kittila of Halloran Farkas + Kittila LLP, representing the plaintiffs, deemed the law "ill-considered" and harmful, rejecting assisted suicide as mercy in the disability community.1
Gov. Meyer's office did not respond to requests for comment.1
Does physician‑assisted suicide law discriminate against disabled persons?
From the standpoint of Catholic teaching, laws permitting physician-assisted suicide (PAS) inherently discriminate against disabled persons by eroding the foundational principle that every human life possesses equal, inviolable dignity regardless of condition or suffering. Such legislation implies that lives marked by disability or illness are of lesser value, potentially pressuring the vulnerable to view themselves as burdens and offering a legal pathway to end their existence based on subjective notions of quality of life. This analysis draws on magisterial documents and encyclicals that emphasize the sacredness of life, the special protection owed to the weak, and the moral imperative to reject any practice that devalues human persons. Rather than promoting autonomy, PAS laws foster a "throwaway culture" that marginalizes the disabled, contradicting the Gospel's call to solidarity and care for all.
Catholic doctrine teaches that human life is sacred from conception to natural death because each person is created in God's image and likeness, endowed with an intrinsic dignity that no circumstance can diminish. This dignity is not contingent on physical ability, productivity, or absence of suffering; it is a gift from the Creator who alone is Lord of life. As Pope John Paul II articulated, "Every human life, from the moment of conception until death, is sacred because the human person has been willed for its own sake in the image and likeness of the living and holy God." This principle applies universally, including to those with disabilities, who "point up more clearly the dignity and greatness of man" despite their limitations.
In this light, PAS laws discriminate by creating a tiered view of worth: able-bodied individuals may choose life freely, but the disabled are subtly coerced into considering death as a dignified option when facing chronic illness or dependency. Such laws signal that suffering or impairment justifies ending life, which undermines the Church's insistence that "human life is sacred because from its beginning it involves the creative action of God and it remains for ever in a special relationship with the Creator." Pope Pius XII warned against any societal practice that treats the deformed, insane, or those with hereditary diseases as "useless burdens," declaring it a violation of natural and divine law that outrages humanity's noblest instincts. By legalizing PAS, societies risk endorsing this very mindset, where the disabled are seen not as full members but as candidates for elimination.
The Church unequivocally condemns euthanasia and assisted suicide as intrinsically evil acts that violate divine law and human dignity, regardless of intentions or circumstances. Direct euthanasia or PAS is "always and per se intrinsically evil—a violation of divine law, an offense against the dignity of the human person." This teaching extends specifically to the disabled, elderly, and ailing, whose lives are under particular threat in a culture that prioritizes efficiency over inherent worth. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith stresses that "there are no circumstances under which human life would cease from being dignified and could, as a result, be put to an end," and assisting in suicide offends the dignity of the person seeking it, even if fulfilling their wish.
Laws legalizing PAS exacerbate discrimination by becoming "accomplices of a grave sin" and causing scandal, distorting consciences and eroding solidarity with the suffering. They legitimize a false "right to choose death," which strikes at the legal order's foundation—the right to life—and wounds human relations, particularly for the disabled who may feel rejected as "discarded lives" or "unworthy lives" based on utility. Pope John Paul II highlighted how such practices risk putting "at risk the elderly, the ailing and the disadvantaged," calling the Church to affirm that dignity is "not lessened by pain or serious illness." In Asia and beyond, the Synod Fathers reaffirmed the sanctity of the lives of the sick, handicapped, and elderly as gifts for all, urging resistance to a "culture of death" that uses demographic arguments to justify ending vulnerable lives.
For disabled persons, this discrimination is acute: PAS laws imply that disability equates to unbearable suffering, ignoring the Church's vision of full inclusion. As Pope Francis notes, persons with disabilities often feel like "hidden exiles" who "exist without belonging," treated as foreign bodies in society and sometimes considered burdens due to their condition. Yet, they offer "a unique contribution to the common good through their remarkable life stories," demanding active participation rather than isolation or elimination. In a market-driven society valuing efficiency, the disabled find "no place," rendering fraternity a mere ideal if laws permit ending their lives under the guise of compassion. The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops echoes this, opposing assisted suicide as a direct threat to life's sanctity and calling for protection of the vulnerable, including those with disabilities, from a "throwaway culture."
Catholic teaching places a unique burden on healthcare workers to serve life, not facilitate death, underscoring how PAS laws discriminate by compelling complicity or forcing conscientious objection. Physicians and nurses are "guardians and servants of human life," and "causing death" can never be medical treatment, even at a patient's request—it counters the profession's ethical core of affirming life. Laws permitting PAS tempt professionals to become "manipulators of life, or even agents of death," increasing their responsibility to resist. Conscientious objection must be protected, as refusing to participate in injustice is a moral duty and basic human right, ensuring no one is forced into acts incompatible with dignity.
This protection is vital for the disabled, who rely on healthcare systems for support, not judgment on their life's worth. Pope John Paul II emphasized providing "effective and accessible forms of treatment, relief of pain, and the ordinary means of support" while avoiding aggressive procedures, but always prioritizing companionship and sympathy over despair-driven requests for death. Societies must foster inclusion, helping the disabled participate fully in work and community according to their capacities, recognizing them as "full-scale subjects" rather than dependents. Legalizing PAS undermines this by promoting self-determination that "means in fact that a doctor helps to terminate life, which is the very ground of every free and responsible act." Instead, the Church calls for palliative care, solidarity, and policies reflecting the family's role as society's foundation, defending the vulnerable without redefining or distorting their rights.
Modern PAS advocacy often promotes a "perfect end"—a choreographed, peaceful death free from messiness—which clashes with the Christian tradition of embracing suffering as redemptive. This ideal, exemplified in cases like Brittany Maynard's, emphasizes aesthetics over reality, leading to assisted suicide as an escape from "bad deaths" marked by pain or dependency, common in disability. Yet, the older Christian aesthetic, as in Dante's portrayal of Manfred's painful, unideal death, accepts imperfection as part of the human journey toward God. PAS laws discriminate by aligning with this superficial vision, pressuring the disabled to conform to societal ideals of perfection rather than finding meaning in their unique dignity. The Church counters with the redemptive value of suffering, shared in Christ's sacrifice, calling for witness to solidarity with the dying as the mark of a life-affirming society.
In conclusion, physician-assisted suicide laws discriminate against disabled persons by institutionalizing a view that their lives are disposable when burdensome, contravening Catholic teachings on equal dignity and the sacredness of life. The Church urges rejection of such laws, promotion of palliative care, and active inclusion of the disabled as essential to the common good. By affirming that "the dignity of each person, no matter how weak or burdened by suffering, implies the dignity of us all," we build a society of true fraternity where no one is discarded. Catholics are called to advocate for life, supporting the vulnerable through compassion and justice.