Assisted dying – the act of ending one’s own life intentionally, with the supervision of professionals – has been a prevalent topic in news media lately. With such polarized views on the issue dominating headlines, AllSides has opted to set a standard for what terminology we use to describe the act, which has been referred to across the political spectrum in various ways, including assisted suicide, death with dignity, medical aid in dying, assisted dying, physician-assisted dying, and physician-assisted suicide.
Advocates, opponents, and media outlets on all sides describe the practice differently. AllSides has not noticed a correlation between an outlet’s Media Bias Rating and which term they use, but has decided to set an editorial standard and use the term “assisted dying” going forward.
Polarizing Terms on Assisted Dying
Some argue the term “assisted suicide” is most accurate because it clearly states the intention of ending one's own life (with assistance).
Others take issue with the term “assisted suicide,” arguing it may import associations with mental health crises that they consider inappropriate to associate with terminally ill patients.
In a 2025 report, the American Medical Association's Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs argued that the term "medical aid in dying" is “not a precise or accurate term because physicians provide compassionate aid to patients in the dying process in many ways, including palliative care, which includes comfort care and hospice.” It concluded that “physician-assisted suicide” more precisely describes the practice of a patient intentionally ending their life with medical assistance. It argued the terms “aid in dying” or “death with dignity” “could be used to describe either euthanasia or palliative/hospice care at the end of life and this degree of ambiguity is unacceptable for providing ethical guidance.”
Last month, Canada suspended plans to expand its assisted dying program (which it refers to as “Medical Assistance in Dying” or MAID) to those with mental illness after recent reports highlighted concerns that the practice had become too widespread. Previously, in August, New York legalized “medical aid in dying” – making it the thirteenth state to do so.
AllSides Discusses Terms Referring to Assisted Dying
With the issue making headlines, AllSides team members discussed the terms used by mainstream outlets. News Analyst and Social Media Editor Malayna Bizier (Right bias), Marketing Communications Manager Krystal Woodworth (Lean Left), and Managing Editor Andy Gorel (Center) engaged in dialogue after Director of Communications Julie Mastrine (Lean Right) asked for team input on the best term for AllSides to use. Here’s what they said:
Woodworth: "Medically assisted dying" feels right to me.
(Woodworth’s comment received a thumbs-up from four team members across the spectrum)
…
Gorel: I think “assisted dying” is fine. Why is medical necessary? The Latin root med means heal, right? It's not healing, it's death.
Bizier: I think medically assisted dying panders to the left.
Woodworth: How does "medically assisted" pander to the left? Medical means, "relating to the study, practice, or treatment of medicine, illness, and injury". It's the most accurate, and least emotive. For some, this is the final treatment option.
Bizier: The left pushes use of the word "medical" in legislation, while the right refutes the terminology with the argument that true medical care and assisted dying do not equate
Woodworth: Refusal to acknowledge it as medical care is quite an intense bias, firmly rooted in an ideology not shared by everyone
Bizier: And calling it medical care is biased in the opposite sense! I think the other two options are a good neutral ground
Woodworth: "Medical" is the most accurate descriptor we have. Under our laws, the only legal route is through the medical system. A doctor evaluates eligibility, a doctor prescribes, and a pharmacist dispenses medication that the patient takes themselves. "Assisted dying" alone doesn't tell readers any of that, and "physician-assisted" covers only part of it. Whether someone considers it care is a “values” question. Whether it's medical is a factual one: it happens through medicine, under medical oversight. Leaving the word out isn't neutral. It removes the most concrete piece of information about what's actually happening.
Bizier: I do see your point there, however, my question is, “Does that objectivity carry the same weight when one side is using it for specific framing?” (my answer is no). Another example: "illegal immigration" is the most correct term judicially-speaking, but we avoid it because the right uses it to push their biased narrative and has adopted it in their messaging. Also, since the medical community is not largely in consensus to a treatment, many would consider the idea more pseudomedical rather than medical in a legitimate sense. That said, I don't see how "physician-assisted dying" isn't appropriate.
Gorel: I still don't see why we don't just use "assisted dying" - it is neutral, unbiased, and irrefutable. Everyone knows what it means. I also don't believe medical is the best way to describe it, since the goal of applying medicines and medical care is to heal. Like I said above, it is in the word from the Latin root. But the debate becomes irrelevant if we just cut any descriptors and use "assisted dying" which seems to be what most outlets across the spectrum use anyways.
For what it's worth, I never thought of assisted dying as a polarizing or problematic term. I did a Headline Roundup and used it in the headline yesterday and didn't even think twice to use "assisted dying." We do not need any more specificity. Outlets from the left and right both use "assisted dying" and outlets from the left and right both use "assisted suicide."
Gorel supported his statement by citing recent headlines from The Guardian (Left), Sky News (Lean Left), The Independent (Lean Left), PBS NewsHour (Lean Left), BBC News (Center), National Post (Lean Right) and New York Post (Right) – all of which used “assisted dying.”
Several other team members, including Mastrine, Chief Technology Officer Scott McDonald (Center), and Product Manager Evan Wagner (Lean Left), weighed in, too.
McDonald said, “Having 'medical' in there seems sort of odd... the Hippocratic Oath is, more or less, ‘do no harm.’ Is the alleviation of misery by doing 'harm' a medical procedure?”
Mastrine added, “Andy makes a really good point about the Latin roots of ‘medical’ meaning ‘to heal’...but per Krys' point, in modern English ‘medical’ has broadened to mean anything pertaining to medicine or healthcare. I don't see ‘medically assisted’ as biased toward the left.”
Wagner agreed that Gorel made a “good point” and wrote, “Our perception of the medical profession has apparently evolved somewhat away from ‘healers’ to ‘people that alter our bodies’... There’s cosmetic surgery, which sort of straddles the border of being ‘medical’ — people are comfortable thinking of it as a ‘procedure’ done by ‘doctors,’ but they might blink twice if you directly called it a ‘medical procedure.’
He added, “Or maybe secularism has evolved our concept of what counts as “healing” to include ending someone's suffering when they're too far gone, so to speak. When everyone believes suicide is a mortal sin and should never be done, that can prolong a lot of suffering needlessly — from a secular utilitarian POV assisted dying makes a lot of sense.”
At the discussion’s conclusion, Editor-in-chief Henry A. Brechter (Center) moved to solidify the term “assisted dying” as AllSides’ official editorial standard.
Terms We Considered, But Chose Not To Use
Physician-Assisted Dying
Mastrine agreed with Bizier that “physician-assisted dying” is mostly “neutral and makes it clear someone else is involved,” but Gorel suggested the specificity was unnecessary.
Medically Assisted Dying
The consensus from the team was that despite assisted dying being something administered by medical professionals, the etymology behind the word “medical” implies healing. McDonald argued that including the word “seems sort of odd” because “the Hippocratic oath is, more or less, ‘do no harm.’”
Other Terms: Assisted Suicide, Euthanasia
“Medical aid in dying,” Mastrine said, was generally “preferred by supporters/advocates and thus biased.” She also added that it was too “vague.”
“Assisted suicide,” Mastrine said, was “the most descriptive” but “probably used more by opponents.” However, a few days later, she had second thoughts and said, “Does the term “assisted dying” obscure that the person is voluntarily dying...? dying can describe something happening to someone, whereas suicide explicitly conveys an intentional action. What the phrase doesn't explicitly communicate is that the intervention is intended to bring about death, rather than simply make the dying process more comfortable. I initially argued against the term "assisted suicide" because it seemed to be used more on one political side. But that raises an interesting question for us. Does the fact that a term is disproportionately used by one side of a debate necessarily make it biased? Or can it just be the most descriptive/accurate term?”
News Editor Emily Allen (Left bias) responded, “I feel like assisted dying does imply that it is intentional! Why else would it be assisted? … I think what's hard is medically assisted death encompasses a lot — in many cases, I would argue that it does "simply make the dying process more comfortable." (For instance, someone who has a terminal disease that will ultimately end in their death after a period of extreme discomfort.) There are other instances of course that we have seen recently, but the point is, many cases are extremely unique and people might feel differently about what the medical assistance is actually completing.”
Further, she stated, “Suicide has its own implications/connotations both politically, socially and medically. Taking my last example, if I think about someone facing a terminal cancer diagnosis taking control of their death or choosing to bring it about in a way that is more comfortable than the cancer would provide, that doesn't feel like suicide in the same way I would use that word to describe a physically healthy person who self-harms to the point of death.”
“Euthanasia” was presented as a “distinct practice” because in most assisted dyings, the patient administers the treatment themselves.
Read more about our editorial philosophy and balanced writing standards.
The State of Assisted Dying in the US
The US has sanctioned about 15,000 assisted deaths since 1997, according to a report compiled by Aging with Dignity, a nonprofit organization that says it “defends the rights of all people as they approach the end of life.”
Assisted dying is legal in 13 states and Washington, D.C., being considered in 16 states, and being challenged in Illinois, New Jersey, and DC, as of September 12, 2026.
Oregon’s 1997 “Death with Dignity Act” was the first assisted dying law of its kind in the US. The legislation currently being considered in Rhode Island was dubbed a “compassionate care act” by proponents, while opponents stand firmly in use of the term “assisted suicide.”
Other laws, such as New York’s, are more closely related to Canada’s MAID legislation, which resulted in 16,499 euthanasias in 2024. New York sanctioned 20 assisted deaths in its first month of legalization from August to September 2026, and the state currently faces a lawsuit from a group of hospice nuns who allege the legislation violates their religious freedom.
Polarized issues can create polarizing word choices, and assisted dying is no exception. The AllSides team rigorously discusses, updates, and internally challenges our editorial standards as part of our mission to help people better understand the world and each other.
This article was written by News Analyst and Social Media Editor Malayna J. Bizier (Right), Managing Editor Andy Gorel (Center), and Director of Communications and Bias Services Julie Mastrine (Lean Right).
.png.webp)
