Tuesday, January 23, 2024

Petition Denied

On January 23, 2024, the Supreme Court of New Jersey denied a petition for certification in Petro et al v. Platkin. The Court stated: 

"A petition for certification of the judgment in A-003837-19 having been submitted to this Court, and the Court having considered same; 

It is ORDERED that the petition for certifications is denied with costs."

On the plus side, I think that we all learned a lot and will continue to do so. Special thanks to E. David Smith and his clients for seeing this matter to the end. 

Perhaps there is yet another path, such as the legislature.

Margaret Dore, Esq.

Sunday, November 12, 2023

No Word Yet

On June 6, 2023, attorney Margaret Dore filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court of New Jersey, which seeks to overturn Petro v Platkin, 472 N.J. Super. 536, 277 A.3d 480 (2022). Dore's brief also supports the petitioners, including Dr. Joseph Glassman, MD, pictured here. 

Dore and the petitioners seek to overturn New Jersey's Medical Aid in Dying for the Terminally Ill Act, as unconstitutional. The Act legalized aid in dying, previously known as assisted suicide, physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia.

The Act allows these practices on both a voluntary and involuntary basis. The Supreme Court has not ruled as to whether it will take the case. The case was previously titled Glassman v. Grewal and also Petro v Grewal.

Thursday, June 29, 2023

Margaret Dore's Amicus Brief to the Supreme Court of New Jersey

Click this link to view Dore's brief as filed on or about June 6, 2023. The version below has been reformatted to accommodate this site.


Amicus Curiae Margaret Dore, who argued the cause below in Petro v. Platkin, 472 N.J. Super. 536, 277 A.3d 480 (2022), seeks to overturn the Medical Aid in Dying for the Terminally Ill Act as unconstitutional. 

The case was initially filed as Glassman v. Grewel, then renamed Petro v. Grewel, and then renamed Petro v. Platkin. This brief is submitted in support of the petitioners: Dr. Joseph Glassman, MD; Manish Pujara, a licensed pharmacist; and Anthony Petro, a patient.

The Act’s findings describe the Act as “entirely voluntary.” There is, however, no enforcement mechanism to make this so. Deaths per the Act are allowed to occur in private, without a witness or even a doctor present. If the patient objected or struggled against administration of the lethal dose, would anyone, other than the person who administered the lethal dose, know what happened? More to the point, the Act allows deaths to occur on both a voluntary and involuntary basis.

Motivations of assisting persons can be financial, for example, to secure an inheritance before mom or dad changes the will. Motivations can also be personal, for example, due to jealousy or to settle a score. 

Tuesday, July 20, 2021

Constitutional Challenge Brief Filed in New Jersey Euthanasia Appeal

Updated Tuesday July 20, 2021


TRENTON, NEW JERSEY, USA. Attorney Margaret Dore, President of Choice is an Illusion, which has fought against assisted suicide and euthanasia legalization throughout the United States, and internationally, has released the following statement in connection with the filing of a constitutional challenge amicus brief, which seeks to invalidate New Jersey’s Medical Aid in Dying for the Terminally Ill Act. The case, Petro et al v. Grewal, is pending in the Superior Court of New Jersey Appellate Division, A-003837-19.