DREDF filed an amicus brief in Curran v. Governor of Delaware, urging the court to reverse the dismissal of a case challenging the Delaware End of Life Options Act. The brief explains that describing assisted suicide as an “entirely voluntary” choice overlooks the realities many disabled people face. When people lack adequate home- and community-based services, experience health care disparities, or struggle with poverty, social isolation, and barriers to basic supports, end-of-life decisions are often shaped by these systemic inequities rather than true choice.
The brief also argues that assisted suicide laws create a troubling and discriminatory double standard. While most people are protected by strong laws and suicide-prevention efforts, these statutes allow medical providers to facilitate death for people with serious disabilities or illnesses. In a health care system where disabled people already face bias, undertreatment, and assumptions about their “quality of life,” this approach risks reinforcing harmful ideas about whose lives are worth living. The brief emphasizes that real autonomy requires real options—such as accessible health care, strong mental health support, adequate home- and community-based services, and quality palliative and hospice care—not expanded access to death.
