(LifeSiteNews) — A federal lawsuit filed this week accuses the state of Colorado of creating a two-tier system for suicide – one that offers prevention for most but a path to death for the disabled.
Four disability rights groups and a 26-year-old woman filed the complaint in U.S. district court, arguing that the state’s so-called “medical aid-in-dying” or assisted suicide law violates federal protections by allowing physicians to prescribe lethal drugs to some disabled patients under circumstances where others would be directed to mental health care.
The plaintiffs include the United Spinal Association, Not Dead Yet, Atlantis ADAPT, and the Institute for Patients’ Rights. Their lawsuit targets Proposition 106, approved by Colorado voters in 2016, which permits doctors to prescribe fatal drugs to “terminally ill” adults expected to die within six months.
The complaint states that the law “assumes that a request for assisted suicide is not an indication of a mental disorder, when other Colorado laws make precisely the opposite assumption for virtually everyone else.”
Mary Gossman, the lead individual plaintiff, lives with a history of anorexia and depression. Although her conditions are now stable, she said she fears being offered lethal drugs rather than treatment if she relapses.
The lawsuit argues that this risk is not hypothetical: 18 individuals received life-ending prescriptions last year under a diagnosis of “severe protein calorie malnutrition.”
Under current law, mental health assessments are not required unless a provider independently raises concern. The plaintiffs say this creates a systemic gap for vulnerable patients who may be influenced by despair, isolation, or implicit bias.
In 2024, 510 individuals were issued prescriptions under the law. Of those prescribed, 429 died. Nearly 60 percent were cancer patients, but diagnoses ranged widely.
A revision to the law last year shortened the mandatory waiting period from 15 days to seven and eliminated it entirely if a “provider” believes that death is closer.
Dawn Russell, a disability advocate, denied that the law has appropriate safeguards, stating that it treats those who are disabled “like your life isn’t worth living.”
The case could force courts to confront whether laws intended to offer “choice” have instead institutionalized abandonment and are normalizing death as a medical response to disability.
