Home  |  Back  |  About  |  Locations  |  Resources  |  Site Map  | Contact
 

Connecticut

Background

For years, assisted-suicide activists have attempted to transform the crime of assisted suicide into a "medical treatment," primarily through legislative proposals and voter initiatives. However they have also tried to achieve their agenda by using the courts. As of mid-2009, a case was pending before the Montana Supreme Court.

Assisted-suicide proposals in the Connecticut legislature (1995, 1997 and 2009) failed to gain support for passage.

Connecticut was the latest state to see a court challenge to a state's assisted-suicide law. On September 30, 2009, the assisted-suicide advocacy group, Compassion & Choices (the former Hemlock Society), filed a complaint on behalf of two Connecticut physicians. The complaint in Blick v. CT sought a declaratory judgment that Connecticut's law does not provide a valid statutory basis to prosecute any licensed physician who provides an intentional lethal overdose of drugs to certain patients.

Current law regarding assisted suicide

Assisted suicide is a felony in Connecticut.
A person is guilty of manslaughter in the second degree when he intentionally causes or aids another person, other than by force, duress or deception, to commit suicide.
[Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-56(a)]

Case: Blick v. CT:  Case dismissed 6/1/10

Blick v. CT centered on persuading the court that assisted suicide is not assisted suicide when it involves a physician and a patient who is dying. Assisted-suicide advocates argued that such a death should be considered "aid-in-dying" and claimed that "'aid-in-dying' is a recognized term of medical art." The Complaint asked the court to find that an assisted-suicide death "does not constitute 'suicide'" within the meaning of the law.

The Connecticut Attorney's office filed a Motion to Dismiss the Complaint and a Memorandum in Support of the Motion to Dismiss on November 19, 2009. On June 1, 2010 Superior Court Judge Julia Aurigemma issued her Decision, ordering that the case be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. In her ruling, Judge Aurigemma thoroughly rejected the attempt to redefine the clear meaning of the word "suicide."  (See page 24 of decision.) 

On June 24, 2010 Compassion & Choices announced that it would not appeal the decision.

Articles and Updates

"Superior Court Judge Dismisses Doctors' Request to Prescribe Lethal Medication to Terminally Ill"
( Hartford Courant - - June 8, 2010 )
Judge wrote that the term "suicide" is intended to include "self-killing" and that the law does not make any exceptions for doctors who help someone commit suicide. More

"Suicide Bill Can Have Unintended Consequences"
( Hartford Courant - Hartford, CT USA - October 15, 2009 )
Physician warns Connecticut residents that legalized assisted suicide leads to health insurance plans paying for assisted suicide to save money. More

"Should Assisted Suicide Be A Crime?"
( Hartford Courant - Hartford, CT USA - October 18, 2009 )
Authors debate their irreconcilable differences about assisted suicide. More

"Doctors file 'aid in dying' lawsuit"
(Connecticut Post - Oct. 7, 2009)
Case questions the state's definition of "suicide."

"Should doctors be allowed to assist with suicides?"
(Hartford Courant - Oct. 8, 2009)
Poll finds overwhelming number of respondents (70.1%) oppose assisted suicide.

"Greenwich, Norwalk doctors file assisted suicide lawsuit"
(Greenwich Times - Oct. 7, 2009)
Attempt to overturn 40-year-old law has national implications.