A member of the Chicago Province of the Little Sisters of the Poor provides comfort to a patient

Cardinal Blase Cupich, archbishop of Chicago, has joined the Carmelite Sisters for the Aged and Infirm, the Chicago Province of the Little Sisters of the Poor, and pharmacist Dr. Luke Vander Bleek in an effort to stop Illinois’ assisted-suicide law from coming into effect. The End-of-Life Options for Terminally Ill Patients Act will take effect on Saturday, September 12 if the court does not act to halt it. Governor J.B. Pritzker of Illinois signed the bill in December 2025 after it passed the state legislature. The provisions of the Act are such that a person confirmed to be terminally ill (less than six months to live) can make a verbal request for medication to directly cause their death, which must be followed by a written request, along with other hoops that must be jumped through by the physician and health care staff.

Supporters of the law insist that no health care worker will be required to participate in the law, and there is an exemption clause for those “unable or unwilling” to provide aid-in-dying. Indeed, Section 60, part (a) of the Act reads: “A health care professional shall not be under any duty, by law or contract, to participate in the provision of aid-in-dying care to a patient as set forth in this Act.” Similar wording attempts to protect “health care entities” (one thinks of Catholic hospitals) in the same way. That’s all well and good. But it depends on an understanding of “participation” as meaning very direct participation. So, ordering the lethal medication, perhaps, or actually handing the lethal medication to the patient. It seems this very direct participation is what the Act means, and what the Illinois legislature means, by participation “in the provision of aid-in-dying care to a patient as set forth in this Act.”

There are, however, other levels of participation, and the Act does not seem to protect health care workers or phsicians from participating on those levels.

For instance, Section 5, part (a), number (1) of the Act reads: “Medical aid in dying is part of general medical care and compliments other end-of-life options, such as comfort care, pain control, palliative care, and hospice care, for individuals to have an end-of-life experience aligned with their beliefs and values.” Then, Section 15, part (b) reads: “An attending physician must provide sufficient information to a patient regarding all appropriate end-of-life options, including comfort care, hospice care, palliative care, and pain control, as well as the foreseeable risks and benefits of each, so that the patient can make a voluntary and affirmative decision regarding the patient’s end-of-life care” (emphasis added). So, if the state of Illinois regards aid in dying as “part of general medical care” and one of the end-of-life options, as it surely does, and if attending physicians “must provide sufficient information to a pateint regarding all appropriate end-of-life options” (again, emphasis added), as the Act reads, then attending physicians opposed to physician-assisted suicide will be put in a position where the law requires them to let their patients know about the end-of-life option called physician-assisted suicide or aid in dying. How can it be possible for faithful Catholic physicians to do that and remain consistent with the values and moral principals of their faith? But how can they not do that and remain within the confines of this law? The bottom line is: they cannot. If a Catholic physician refuses, out of moral or religious concerns, to avoid informing a patient of the physician-assisted suicide end-of-life option, he or she will be made accountable for that by some family attorney who finds a sympathetic judge. So, the exemption clause does not go far enough, because it is contradicted by another clause in the same Act, which requires attending physicians to, at the very least, inform their patients of the assisted-suicide end-of-life option.

Also, Section 70, part (b), number (2) of the Act reads: “If a health care professional or health care entity is unable or unwilling to carry out an individual’s request for aid in dying, the professional or entity shall, at a minimum: … refer the individual either to a health care professional who is able and willing to evaluate and qualify the individual or to another individual or entity to assist the requesting individual in seeking aid in dying, in accordance with the Health Care Right of Conscience Act” (emphasis added).

So, if I personally don’t want to provide aid in dying to my patient because I am Catholic and, as such, believe in the intrinsic dignity of the human person, and believe it’s my responsibility to relieve them of their pain rather than surrender to it, I am still required to refer my patient to someone else who will provide aid in dying to them, or who will find someone who will. Clearly, the Illinois legislature’s idea of “participation” in aid in dying is limited to only very direct participation. Analogously, if I don’t want to help someone commit acts of self-harm, such as cutting, or commit some other crime against their human dignity, I’m still obliged to find someone who will help them commit self-harm! I don’t have to do it, but I have to find someone who will. That’s not participation? That’s absurd!

Finally, Section 35, part (a), number (14) of the Act reads: “Following the request of a patient for aid in dying, the attending physician shall conduct an evaluation of the patients and: … deliver, in accordance with State and federal law, the prescription personally, by mail, or through authorized electronic transmission to a licensed pharmacist who will dispense the medication, including ancillary medications, to the qualified patient, or to a person expressly designated by the qualified patient in person or with a signature required on delivery, by mail service, or by messenger service.” Doubtless, this is the part of the Act that inspired participation in the act by Dr. Vander Bleek, the pharmacist. Dr. Vander Bleek owns a pharmacy, and he doesn’t want to be dispensing medications for the purpose of killing people, or even allowing people to kill themselves. But there are no provisions here to protect his non-participation in the process. Apparently, the Illinois legislature doesn’t think dispensing medications on a doctor’s order to a patient for the purpose of killing him or herself counts as “particpation” in aid in dying. The Illinois legislature has lost its collective mind.

Cardinal Cupich, for once doing something I support, the Sisters, and Dr. Vander Bleek are suing on grounds of religious freedom. They are arguing that the End-of-Life Options for Terminally Ill Patients Act violates their First Amendment right to freedom of religion by compelling them to participate in a process that includes patient self-harm and suicide, contrary to their strongly held religious and/or moral beliefs. As I read the Act, and I’m not an attorney, but he language is pretty clear, they are correct. I suspect the court will rule against them, however (it is Illinois), and sometime after a Catholic physician will be disciplined for not informing his patient of all end-of-life options, including aid in dying, or for not referring her patient to another physician or hospital that is willing to assist them in committing suicide.

Was there ever a time when our society truly respected human life and dignity, where we genuinely dared not go where angels fear to tread? I don’t know. But if there ever was, that time is long gone. Today, our elites rush in to nearly every opportunity to push the ethical envelope, to expand the understanding of what is acceptible and permitted, even lauded. And, what is more, our elites demand that others participate. What was once called surrender is now honored as noble. What was once ground on which no one dared tread, is now ground on which we build our moral or, rather, our immoral edifices. For just because society says something is acceptable morally does not mean it is, and does not mean it is healthy for a society. Too often, what becomes allowable becomes expected, and then demanded. Where will this brave new world empty of Christ and with God off the radar lead us to, if not to perdition? ]

Be Christ for all. Bring Christ to all. See Christ in all.