A bill that would allow terminally ill, mentally competent adults to end their lives with prescribed medication passed the New York state Senate on Monday.
Should Gov. Kathy Hochul sign the bill into law, it would make New York the 12th state in the country, along with Washington, D.C., to approve medical aid in dying.
The Governor has not indicated whether she backs the bill so far. A spokesperson for her office said Monday that she will review the legislation when it reaches her desk.
The legislation, known as the Medical Aid in Dying Act, passed the Senate with a 35-27 vote and the state Assembly on April 29 by an 81-67 vote. The bills passed largely along party lines as Republican lawmakers expressed concerns echoed by Catholic officials that the bill was tantamount to “state-sanctioned suicide.”
‘This is about personal autonomy’
Supporters gathered in Albany on Monday morning to celebrate the anticipated outcome, after Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins noted on June 5 that there was enough support in the chamber to pass the bill.
“There is no more difficult issue than confronting the death of a loved one — or even of yourself,” said Sen. Brad Hoylman-Sigal, the bill’s prime Senate sponsor. “This is about personal autonomy. This is about liberty. This is about exercising one’s own freedom to control one’s own body.”
Hoylman-Sigal said the legislation “wasn’t about ending a person’s life — it was about shortening their death” for those with terminal illnesses who experience prolonged suffering.
Under the bill, eligible adults diagnosed with six months or less to live would be able to request a prescription to self-administer life-ending medication. Two physicians must confirm the diagnosis and determine that the patient is mentally capable. Patients must make both oral and written requests, witnessed by two adults, and may rescind their request at any time.
Assembly Member Amy Paulin of Scarsdale, who sponsored the bill in the Assembly, called the vote one of her proudest moments in office.
“People said: ‘Why now?’ Because we felt New Yorkers’ energy,” Paulin said. “They didn’t want to spend $100,000 to travel to Oregon. They wanted this right here, in New York.”
The bill includes safeguards to prevent coercion and protect vulnerable individuals, including provisions allowing health care providers to opt out. It also shields participating providers from criminal or civil liability when acting in good faith.
Medical organizations such as the New York State Academy of Family Physicians and the New York State Nurses Association supported the bill, as did advocacy groups such as Compassion & Choices and Death with Dignity.
At Monday’s news conference, advocates and lawmakers remembered individuals who died while waiting for the bill’s passage. Dr. Jeremy Boal, who stepped down from his role as chief clinical officer for the Mount Sinai Health System after receiving an ALS diagnosis, said knowing he could soon have the option of medical aid in dying brought him peace.
“Even with the best hospice care, I may suffer beyond measure,” Boal said. “But knowing this option could be available to me makes all the difference.”
Corinne Carey, senior campaign director for Compassion & Choices, said more than 20 terminally ill New Yorkers died during the 10-year campaign “begging lawmakers to give them relief.” The legislation was first introduced by then-Sen. Diane Savino of Staten Island during the 2015-16 session.
Carey emphasized that the effort was not only about dying, but about living meaningfully to the end.
“This campaign isn’t about death. It’s about how we spend the last weeks, hours and moments,” Carey said. “It allowed us to shift from this place of loneliness and fear and despair … to orchestrate something truly beautiful.”
Sen. Jessica Scarcella-Spanton, a co-sponsor, reflected on the role of “yellow shirt” advocates who regularly filled the Capitol, many of whom did not live to see the bill passed.
“We know that there’s people like us who fight on behalf of our families, on behalf of our constituents, who have personal stories,” she said. “But then we know that there were people who were fighting on behalf of themselves.”
She read a message from Gina Longo, a terminally ill constituent who died weeks before the vote:
“I believe I’m heading into liver failure and have been bedridden for weeks … I just pray for them [others suffering], because nobody should have to live in this pain.”
‘State-sanctioned suicide’
Opponents of the bill, including state Catholic officials, have long raised concerns about potential coercion and misuse if medical aid in dying becomes law and want Hochul to veto the bill.
In a statement released after the Assembly vote in April, New York’s Catholic bishops, led by Cardinal Timothy Dolan, called the bill a form of “state-sanctioned suicide” that endangers vulnerable populations and undermines efforts to prevent suicide.
The bishops warned that legalizing medical aid in dying could pressure the elderly, disabled, and those in underserved communities to end their lives out of fear of being a burden.
On his SiriusXM program, Tuesday, Cardinal Dolan told listeners that he ran into Gov. Hochul at Manhattan’s Puerto Rican Day parade on Sunday and made an in-person plea for her to veto the bill.
“She didn’t commit herself. But something tells me her gut’s not into this,” Dolan said on the Conversations with Cardinal Dolan program. “So I’m hoping she’ll take the courageous, right thing to do.”
Sen. Hoylman-Sigal said Monday, however, that he remains hopeful that Hochul will sign the bill. He said he has had several informal conversations with the Governor about it “but nothing that I am prepared to share.”
Fears of ‘compassion without transparency’
Before the passage Monday evening, state senators were divided over whether the bill includes sufficient safeguards when it comes to coercion and mental health to autonomy and physician oversight.
Critics expressed concern about the absence of a mandatory waiting period and the potential for abuse.
“So we can give people time to change their mind about a flight they booked, but not about whether they’re going to kill themselves?” asked Sen. George Borrello of Chautauqua County, who voted against the bill.
Hoylman-Sigal countered that the process is inherently lengthy due to required medical evaluations, written and oral requests, and physician review. He noted that “fully one-third of terminally ill patients die before completing the paperwork” in states with mandated waiting periods, citing data from California.
Borrello also raised concerns about the accuracy of terminal diagnoses.
“When doctors give someone the terminal illness prediction… they’re only right 20% of the time. Does that sound like a good percentage to you?” Borrello asked, though he did not reference the data he was citing.
Hoylman-Sigal responded that studies have shown most predictions are overestimates, not underestimates, referring to one study from the University of Chicago.
Lawmakers then clashed over how the prescribed medication would be handled and secured.
“We’re talking about medicine that could kill people. There is no actual responsibility… to ensure and monitor that that drug is being handled properly,” Borrello said, asking why the medications are not administered by medical professionals in a controlled environment.
“There are thousands of people with terminal illnesses currently on home hospice care in the comfort of their homes with their family members and other loved ones, and there are a huge number of opiate medications in connection with that hospice treatment,” Hoylman-Sigal said. “So, we’re looking at the same protocols that handle that apply the handling in return of those medications.”
He added that “in 27 years… there hasn’t been a single case of medication falling into the wrong hands.”
Sen. Bill Weber of Rockland County echoed concerns from the disability community, asking whether patients in long-term care facilities could be subtly pressured into choosing assisted death. “Are physicians qualified to recognize when there’s coercion?” he asked.
Hoylman-Sigal pointed to multiple layers of protection, including the requirement that two witnesses to the request for life-ending medication be disinterested parties with no financial stake.
“Back to experience since 1997… not a single case, not one of coercion has been uncovered,” he said.
Before the vote, Hoylman-Sigal noted that no state with a medical aid-in-dying law has experienced documented abuse or unintended consequences.
“There hasn’t been one literal case of transgression or nefariousness as a result of the law,” he said.
He added that he respects the dissenters.
“They are guided by their own personal moral code or religion and their position as they see it in the world and as it relates to their constituents,” Hoylman-Sigal said. “But our message, and it will continue to be, is that this is a personal decision.”
Weber remained unconvinced, calling the bill “compassion without transparency,” and warning it could lead to “neglect and coercion cloaked in kindness.”
Hoylman-Sigal argued that the bill was narrowly tailored and fundamentally different from broader assisted dying policies in countries like Canada.
“There’s no requirement in Canada for a terminal illness… it’s not self-administered,” Hoylman-Sigal said. “Our bill is the diametric opposite.”
Sen. Gustavo Rivera, who voted in support of the bill, addressed what he called “disingenuous hypotheticals,” adding: “This is not something that is taken lightly… Two [physicians] have to make independent determinations under the penalty of perjury. They’re giving up their license if they’re going to take them make the wrong decision here, they’re making a determination for someone who’s already made that decision and who has to be able to do it themselves. This is a decision that is made by people who are in deep, deep pain.”
