Frum Teaneck Doctor Gets Shamed for His Religious Beliefs in Fighting New Euthanasia Law (VIDEO)

When Dr. Yosef Glassman, the Teaneck geriatric physician who is legally challenging New Jersey’s Medical Aid in Dying (MAID) for the Terminally Ill Act first started his legal battle, he knew he was in for a fight.

On August 1st, the law passed allowing any adult New Jersey resident with decision-making capacity and fewer than six months to live to obtain and self-administer “medication” to end their life.

The ramificantions of this law are fightening with suicide being “legalized” and the idea that insurance companies might soon demand that patients take this route instead of covering treatment.

But Dr. Glassman was surprised to find himself criticized as heartless and forcing his own religious principles to blind his decisions. Angry opponents fail to recognize that Dr. Glassman is following the recommendations of The AMA (American Medical Association that holds“physician-assisted suicide is fundamentally incompatible with the physician’s role as healer, would be difficult or impossible to control, and would pose serious societal risks.”

In addition, the 6,500-member Medical Society of New Jersey also opposes the law, saying it erodes patients’ trust in physicians due to “[w]ondering if your physician is trying to cure your illness or is trying to convince you to die.” They claim that it violates doctors’ obligation “to help and not harm the patient.”

According to Dr. Glassman’s original claim, the Act forces physicians and pharmacists “to be involved in the machinery of death,” demanding that they either facilitate euthanasia prescriptions or pass patient records along to those who will.

In addition, Smith and Associates, the law firm representing Glassman and the other two plaintiffs (a pharmacist and a terminally ill patient) emphasize that there are 10 legal arguments to this case with the religious beliefs just one argument. Among the arguments are the state’s responsibility to defend life.

Dr. Glassman’s legal team won a brief victory on August 14th with a temporary restraining order which was later dissolved by the appellate division.

Those interested in learning more about this case or joining the efforts are asked to contact [email protected]

This content, and any other content on TLS, may not be republished or reproduced without prior permission from TLS. Copying or reproducing our content is both against the law and against Halacha. To inquire about using our content, including videos or photos, email us at [email protected].

Stay up to date with our news alerts by following us on Twitter, Instagram and Facebook.

**Click here to join over 20,000 receiving our Whatsapp Status updates!**

**Click here to join the official TLS WhatsApp Community!**

Got a news tip? Email us at [email protected], Text 415-857-2667, or WhatsApp 609-661-8668.

3 COMMENTS

  1. Please change the subject. He was not shamed, R”L. They attempted to shame him. He was criticized or insulted or verbally abused for his views. Per the proper definition of the term… he was not shamed unless he was actually caused to feel ashamed.

Comments are closed.