FAQs

Watch some of our advocates tackle the hard questions:

What brought you to advocate for medical aid in dying as an end-of-life option?

Can disabled people be pushed into medical aid in dying?

Can a proxy make the decision for someone requesting medical aid in dying?

Do you have any advice for engaging with lawmakers? What have you found to be effective?

How have you, as physicians and as patients, navigated the disparities people with disabilities face in the healthcare system?

What is end-of-life care?

End-of-life care is specialized healthcare delivered in the final months or years of one’s life. Types of end-of-life care include: 

  • Palliative care is specialized medical care for individuals living with a serious illness. Palliative care can improve the quality of life for both the patient and their family.

  • Hospice care focuses on providing care, comfort, and quality of life to individuals with a serious illness approaching the end of life.

  • Medical aid in dying allows a mentally capable adult with a prognosis of six months or less to live to request a prescription from their doctor for medication to self-ingest to bring about a peaceful death.

Is there support for medical aid in dying in the disability community?

Yes. There is strong support for medical aid in dying in the disability community. In fact, recent national polling found that nearly 8 out of 10 U.S. residents (79%) who self-identify as having a disability agree that “medical aid in dying should be legal for terminally ill, mentally capable adults who chose to self-ingest medication to die peacefully.” 

The disability community is not a monolith. We respect that medical aid in dying is not an option some would choose at the end of life. That should not prevent the majority of people who support access to the law from making informed healthcare choices. All people want to make decisions that will meet their particular needs, values, and priorities. 

Is expanding end-of-life care a disability justice issue?

Yes. Choice, autonomy, and dignity are core values shared by the end-of-life care movement and the disability rights movement. Advocating to expand end-of-life options — with safeguards in place — removes another barrier to equitable healthcare access.

Do medical aid-in-dying laws include safeguards to eliminate the risk of coercion and exploitation?

Yes. In the United States, medical aid-in-dying laws have strong safeguards. Among other requirements, two different healthcare providers must confirm that a requesting individual is terminally ill with a prognosis of six months or less to live. Coercing someone to use medical aid in dying is a felony. It is punishable under state criminal laws. Medical aid in dying is a practice proven by decades of experience in authorized jurisdictions. There is not a single substantiated case of abuse or coercion. Nor are there any civil or criminal charges filed related to the practice—not one. For example, Disability Rights Oregon, the Protection and Advocacy program for Oregon, affirmed that there have been no cases of discrimination in the 27 years the Oregon Death with Dignity Act has been in place

Many people with disabilities can make decisions about their end-of-life care. If these individuals meet the stringent requirements to access medical aid in dying, there is no reason why they should not have the autonomy to make their own end-of-life care decisions. 


Us for Autonomy only advocates for medical aid in dying laws that provide strong safeguards to protect individuals from coercion and exploitation, which have more protections than some international laws. 


Where is medical aid in dying authorized?

Medical aid in dying is authorized in 11 U.S. jurisdictions:

  • Oregon

  • Washington

  • Vermont

  • Montana

  • California

  • Colorado

  • Hawai’i

  • New Jersey

  • Maine

  • Washington D.C.

  • New Mexico

How does Us for Autonomy refer to the community?

People First Language (e.g., “person with a disability”) is a way of communicating that reflects knowledge and respect for people with disabilities by choosing words that recognize the person first and foremost as the primary reference and not his or her disability.

Identity-First Language (e.g., “disabled person”) centers on disability while still recognizing personhood. Identity-first language was born from the disability pride movement, which positions that disability is nothing to be ashamed of.

Us for Autonomy recognizes and respects each individual’s right to refer to themselves as they choose. Us for Autonomy uses the terminology interchangeably.