A.B. 374: The Usual Assisted Suicide Crock

I have started to dig into A.B. 374 and it is the usual smoke and mirrors beloved of assisted suicide advocates. For example, I am sure we will hear about the safeguards against the mentally ill from being assisted in suicide. But the actual wording of the legislation belies this soothing notion. For example, with regard to mental state, the suicidal patient needs to be “capable,” to receive assisted suicide. Capable is merely the ability to communicate health care decisions, which is not at all the same thing as not being mentally ill.

7195(5)(c)”Capable” means that in the opinion of the patient’s attending physician or consulting physician, a patient has the ability to make and communicate health care decisions to health care providers, including communication through persons familiar with the patient’s manner of communicating, if those persons are available.

And here is another example of the usual word games assisted suicide promoters like to play: The legislation states that if a prescribing doctor believes that a patient’s depression might impair his or her judgment (fat chance, given the ideological beliefs of pro assisted suicide mental health care professionals, he said cynically), the patient is supposed to be referred for “counseling.” Now, most of us would consider counseling to be sustained treatment to alleviate or correct the cause of the perceived impairment. But under the legislation, it really only means a consultation, which might merely be a brief conversation:

7195 (5)(e) “Counseling” means a consultation between a state licensed psychiatrist or psychologist and a patient for the purpose of determining whether the patient is suffering from a psychiatric or psychological disorder, or depression causing impaired judgment.”

Wait, there’s more. I will post details in a separate entry: But A.B. 374 would not permit Catholic nursing homes or most other health care facilities with a policy opposed to assisted suicide to refuse to allow assisted suicide to take place on their premises. “Choice” my right nostril.

Dear Reader,

Can I be direct with you?

War abroad. Socialists on the rise. AI upending human life. Endless uproar online. The modern attention economy doesn’t want readers — it wants users enslaved to the tyranny of the present.

First Things is the antidote: literary excellence, timeless truths, and a fixed point of reference in a culture that has lost its bearings.

But we can’t do it without readers like you.

Our goal: Raise $150,000 by November 1 to sustain First Things in the year ahead.


Your gift anchors readers in the permanent things.

Make your Fall Campaign gift now using the button below.

GIVE NOW

If you have any questions or would like more information, please contact Giovanni Del Piero, Director of the Editor’s Circle, at gdelpiero@firstthings.com or 212-627-1985.

Next
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE

The Church in the Age of Therapy

Matthew Loftus

In 1966, Philip Rieff wrote in The Triumph of the Therapeutic that “Religious man was born to…

Canada’s Deadliest Blind Spot

Anna Farrow

On September 20, the Daily Mail ran a story with the provocative headline, “Our 83-year-old Christian grandmother…

The Faithful Joy of Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen

Mike Aquilina

Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen seem to have had little in common. She favored rhinestones; he wore…