>>> HELLO, EVERYONE AND A VERY WARM WELCOME TO "AMANPOUR AND COMPANY."

HERE IS WHAT IS COMING UP.

AN URGENT SEARCH AND RESCUE OFF ITALY'S COAST AS A MIGRANT SHIP WRECK CLAIMS MORE THAN 60 LIVES.

WE'LL HAVE A SPECIAL REPORT.

ACROSS THE ATLANTIC, THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION GETS TOUGH ON ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION WITH A CONTROVERSIAL NEW LAW.

I'M JOINED BY IMMIGRATION ATTORNEY MARTINEZ WHO KNOWS FIRSTHAND WHAT LIFE IS LIKE FOR PEOPLE SEEKING ASYLUM.

>>> THEN, AS CANADA WRESTLES WITH WHO HAS THE RIGHT TO DIE, I TALK TO DR. MADELEINE LEE, ONE OF THE LEADING FIGURES IN THE COUNTRY'S ASSISTED DYING PROGRAM PLUS.

>> WITHIN A MATTER OF MONTHS, YOU SEE THIS BLACK POWER SCARING WHITE PEOPLE, CHANGING THE POLL NUMBERS.

>> THE YEAR THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT CHANGED FOREVER.

AUTHOR MARK WHITAKER TALKS TO WALTER ISAACSON ABOUT "SAYING IT LOUD 1966, THE RISE OF THE BLACK PANTHERS."

>>> "AMANPOUR & COMPANY" IS MADE POSSIBLE BY -- THE ANDERSON FAMILY FUND.

SUE AND EDGAR WACHENHEIM III.

CANDACE KING WEIR.

JIM ATWOOD AND LESLIE WILLIAMS.

MARK J. BLECHNER.

SETON J. MELVIN.

BERNARD AND DENISE SCHWARTZ.

COO AND PATRICIA EWAN, COMMITTED TO BRIDGING CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN OUR COMMUNITIES.

BARBARA HOPE ZUCKERBERG.

THE FAMILY FOUNDATION OF LEILA AND MICKEY STRAUS.

WE TRY TO LIVE IN THE MOMENT.

TO NOT MISS WHAT'S RIGHT IN FRONT OF US.

AT MUTUAL OF AMERICA WE BELIEVE TAKING CARE OF TOMORROW CAN HELP YOU MAKE THE MOST OF TODAY.

MUTUAL OF AMERICA FINANCIAL GROUP.

RETIREMENT SERVICES AND INVESTMENTS.

ADDITIONAL SUPPORT PROVIDED BY THESE FUNDERS AND BY CONTRIBUTIONS TO YOUR PBS STATION FROM VIEWERS LIKE YOU.

THANK YOU.

>>> WELCOME TO THE PROGRAM, EVERYONE.

I'M PAULA NEWTON IN NEW YORK WHERE THE GOVERNMENT IS CRACKING DOWN ON ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION WITH A CONTROVERSIAL NEW LAW TO CURB CROSSINGS AT THE SOUTHERN BORDER AND MAKE IT HARD FOR PEOPLE CLAIMING ASYLUM LEGALLY INCLUDING THOSE ENTERING THE UNITED STATES VIA A THIRD COUNTRY OR THOSE IN FACT WHO DON'T GIVE ADVANCED NOTICE TO THE AUTHORITIES.

NOW, CRITICS SAY THE LAW BEARS A RESEMBLANCE TO A TRUMP ERA LAW ALREADY STRUCK DOWN IN COURT AND MANY LAWMAKERS WITHIN BIDEN'S PARTY ARE VOICING OPPOSITION.

IT'S A NOTABLE DEPARTURE IN POLICY FOR ADMINISTRATION.

HERE IS CANDIDATE JOE BIDEN SPEAKING BACK IN MARCH 2020 ABOUT HIS VISION FOR THE COUNTRY.

>> A NATION WHERE WE LIVE BY THE VALUES THAT EMBRACES IMMIGRANTS, REFUGEES, ASYLUM SEEKERS, DOES NOT SLAM THE DOOR ON THOSE FLEEING PERSECUTION, VIOLENCE AND OPPRESSION.

DOES NOT MAKE PEOPLE SEEKING ASYLUM HAVE TO STAY IN ANOTHER COUNTRY TO DO IT.

GETS CHILDREN OUT OF CAGES.

REUNITES FAMILIES.

>> WE'LL RETURN TO THOSE COMMENTS BUT IMMIGRATION IS A GLOBAL CRISIS IMPACTING NOT JUST THE UNITED STATES BUT ASIA, AFRICA AND EUROPE AND WITH DEVASTATING RESULTS.

MORE THAN 60 PEOPLE ARE DEAD AFTER A WOODEN BOAT SANK OFF ITALY'S SOUTHEASTERN COAST SUNDAY.

ON BOARD WERE MIGRANTS FROM AFGHANISTAN, PAKISTAN, SOMALIA AND IRAN.

DOZENS ARE STILL MISSING AT THIS HOUR AND AN URGENT SEARCH AND RESCUE IS UNDERWAY.

IN A MOMENT, WE'LL HAVE MORE OF COURSE, ABOUT THE U.S. MIGRATION ISSUE BUT FIRST, CORRESPONDENT BEN WEDEMAN AS THIS REPORT FROM ROME.

>> Reporter: THE TIDE BRINGS IN WRECKAGE OF A BOAT AND MORE LIVES LOST IN THE MEDITERRANEAN.

AMONG THE DEAD TO WASH UP ON THIS LONELY BEACH AN 8 MONTH OLD INFANT.

THE 20 METER LONG WOODEN BOAT REPORTEDLY TOOK TO SEA FROM TURKEY THURSDAY WITH PERHAPS AS MANY AS 250 PEOPLE ON MANY AS 250 PEOPLE ON BOARD COMING FROM PAKISTAN.

ONE OF THE FIRST ON THE SCENE BEFORE DAWN.

WHEN WE ARRIVED WE FOUND TEN DEAD HE SAID AND AS DAWN BROKE WE FOUND MORE AND MORE.

ONLY AROUND 80 PEOPLE SURVIVED THE SHIP WRECK.

THE REST PERHAPS WELL OVER 100, EITHER DEAD OR MISSING.

THIS TYPE OF TRAGEDY SHOULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED SAID THE GOVERNOR ROBERTO.

SUNDAY POPE FRANCIS TOLD THE FAITHFUL IN ST. PETERS SQUARE I PRAY FOR EACH OF THEM FOR THE MISSING AND FOR THE OTHER MIGRANTS WHO SURVIVED.

BUT THOUGHTS AND PRAYERS WON'T SAVE LIVES.

SINCE 2014 MORE THAN 20,000 PEOPLE HAVE DIED TRYING TO CROSS THE MEDITERRANEAN ESCAPING WAR, FAMINE, REPRESSION, CHAOS AND HOPELESSNESS.

INCREASINGLY, EUROPE INCLUDING ITALY IS TAKING A HARD LINE ON THOSE FROM THE GLOBAL SOUTH FLEEING THEIR NATIVE LANDS.

IN A STATEMENT, ITALY'S RIGHT WING PRIME MINISTER EXPRESSED WHAT SHE CALLED HER PROFOUND PAIN AT THE DISASTER.

BUT SHE WROTE TO POWER ON AN ANIMAL ANTI IMMIGRANT PLATFORM AND APPROVED LAWS MAKING IT DIFFICULT FOR VOLUNTEER GROUPS TO CARRY OUT RESCUES AT SEA.

WHAT EUROPE CAN DO FOR THOSE IN NEED HAS BEEN MADE VIVIDLY CLEAR BY ITS EMBRACE OF MILLIONS OF UKRAINIAN REFUGEES.

AN EMBRACE THAT DOESN'T EXTEND THOSE BRAVING DEADLY VOYAGES SUCH AS THESE.

>> THANKS TO BEN WEDEMAN FOR THAT REPORT.

TURNING BACK TO THE UNITED STATES, WHAT WILL THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION'S NEW LAW MEAN FOR MIGRANTS AND ASYLUM SEEKERS TRYING TO ENTER THE COUNTRY?

IMMIGRATION LAWYER ANDRE MARTINEZ KNOWS FIRSTHAND HOW DIFFICULT THE PROCESS IS AND JOINS ME LIVE FROM KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI.

THANK YOU FOR BRINGING US YOUR INSIGHTS AFTER SO MANY YEARS ON THE GROUND DEALING WITH CLIENTS.

YOU KNOW, WE HEARD CANDIDATE BIDEN, RIGHT?

HE WAS CLEAR HE WAS CATEGORY.

A BAN THAT YOU BELIEVE COULD BE DANGEROUS, ILLEGAL AND LEAD TO MIGRANT DEATHS.

WHAT IS THE ADMINISTRATION PROPOSING HERE AS YOU UNDERSTAND IT?

>> SO ADMINISTRATION IS PROPOSING THE MOST RESTRICTED MEASURE SO FAR IN THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION AND IT IS REALLY TO REBUT ANY PRESUMPTION OF ASYLUM ELIGIBILITY FOR ANY NON-MEXICAN ASYLUM SEEKER WHO ENTERS THE UNITED STATES BETWEEN PORTS OF ENTRY IF THEY HAVE NOT FIRST SAW AND BEEN DENIED ASYLUM IN MEXICO.

NOW, OF COURSE, THE PROBLEM HERE IS THAT THE MEXICAN ASYLUM SYSTEM BY THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATES OWN COUNTRY CONDITIONS REPORTS IS SUBPAR.

IT IS NOT ADEQUATE FOR PEOPLE TRULY FLEEING FOR THEIR LIVES TO FEEL SAFE AND PROTECTED IN A COUNTRY THAT HAS RAMPED VIOLENCE AGAINST MIGRANTS STONED IN MEXICO AND CARTEL VIOLENCE.

I CALL IT IN MY PRACTICE THE REFUGEE HUNGER GAMES.

IT IS A SURVIVE STRATEGY TO MAKE IT THROUGH MEXICO AND THAT IS WITH MANY OF MY CLIENTS TELLING ME STORIES ABOUT THE MEXICO GUATEMALA BORDER BEING ONE OF THE MOST DIFFICULT PLACES TO CROSS BECAUSE OF MEXICAN POLICE AND MEXICAN GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS WHO ACTUALLY TURNOVER MIGRANTS TO THE CARTELS IN MEXICO WHERE THEY ARE KIDNAPPED, TORTURED, HELD FOR RANSOM AND WORSE.

>> YOU KNOW, THAT'S QUITE STARK YOU CALLING IT THE REFUGEE HUNGER GAMES.

LET US INTO THE LIVES OF YOUR CLIENTS GIVEN THE FACT THEY ALREADY ARE HAVING A HARD TIME AND YET, THE NEW BAN AS WE UNDERSTAND IT, YOU'D BE DEEMED INELIGIBLE FOR ASYLUM UNLESS YOU WERE FROM MEXICO.

>> THERE IS A REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION OF INELIGIBILITY.

THERE ARE SOME EXCEPTIONS UNDER THIS PROPOSED RULE.

GRANTED, THIS HAS NOT TAKEN EFFECT AND THERE WILL BE A 30-DAY COMMENT PERIOD ONCE THE REGULATION IS PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER BUT YES, THIS WOULD DEEM MOST ASYLUM APPLICANTS AT THE U.S. BORDER, ANYONE THAT CROSSED THROUGH MEXICO TO BE BASICALLY INELIGIBLE UNLESS THEY MEET A FEW EXCEPTIONS INCLUDING HUMANITARIAN EXCEPTIONS LIKE A MEDICAL EMERGENCY, HUMAN TRAFFICKING, ET CETERA.

FOR MY CLIENTS, MANY OF THEM FLEEING THE NORTHERN TRIANGLE COUNTRIES OF HONDURAS, GUATEMALA AND EL SALVADOR, THIS COULD BE A DEATH SENTENCE FOR THEM BECAUSE THEY'RE FLEEING FROM A COUNTRY THAT HAS BASIC IMMUNITY FOR PERPETRATORS OF CRIME.

I THINK OF ALL THE WOMEN THAT I REPRESENT WHO ARE FLEEING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE.

SOME FROM PARTNERS WHO ARE POLICE OFFICERS IN THE COUNTRY AND HAVE TOTAL IMPUNITY TO DO WHATEVER THEY WANT TO MY FEMALE CLIENTS.

THEY CAN MURDER WITHOUT ANY REPERCUSSION BY THE GOVERNMENT AND THEN MY CLIMATES TRAVEL.

THEY TAKE THIS COURAGEOUS JOURNEY FROM THEIR COUNTRY AND THEY OFTEN TIMES ARE TRAVELING ON THE TOP OF TERRAINS THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY OF MEXICO.

THEY ARE BRINGING SOMETIMES SMALL CHILDREN WITH THEM FLEEING THIS VIOLENCE THAT THEY CAN GET NO PROTECTION FROM THEIR OWN GOVERNMENT FROM AND THEN THEY ARE MET WITH CORRUPTION BY THE MEXICAN GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS WHO ARE FURTHER PERSECUTING THEM IN ROUTE TO THE UNITED STATES.

MY CLIENTS TELL ME THEY COME TO THE UNITED STATES BECAUSE WE HAVE A FUNCTIONING JUSTICE SYSTEM.

IT'S NOT PERFECT BUT IT IS MUCH MORE FUNCTIONING AND THE RULE OF LAW EXISTS IN THE UNITED STATES IN A WAY THAT IT JUST SIMPLY DOES NOT IN MEXICO AND SO MY CLIENTS NEED THE PROTECTION THAT THE U.S. GOVERNMENT CAN PROVIDE TO THEM, IF THE LAW IS PROPERLY ENFORCED.

NOW, THE PROBLEM HERE IS THAT I THINK THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION WILL BE ULTIMATELY LITIGATED FOR THIS PROPOSED RULE ONCE IT BECOMES A REGULATION AND GOES THROUGH THE COMMENT PERIOD AND THIS WILL LIKELY END UP A LOT LIKE THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION'S ATTEMPT AT THE SAME TRANSIT BAN IN 2020 WHERE THE FEDERAL COURTS OF APPEALS WILL ULTIMATELY GET INVOLVED AND THIS WILL BE ENJOYED BECAUSE IT IS A CLEAR VIOLATION OF ASYLUM LAW THAT ALLOWS PEOPLE TO SEEK PROTECTION IN THE UNITED STATES EVEN THROUGH THE PORTS OF ENTRY AND WITHIN THE UNITED STATES OUTSIDE OF PORTS OF ENTRY.

SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION TAKE A CLOSE LOOK AT THE ASYLUM LAWS IN THE BOOKS IN OUR COUNTRY BECAUSE THIS WILL BE ULTIMATELY A WASTE OF TAXPAYER DOLLARS AND AN UNNECESSARY LITIGATION THAT IN THE MEANTIME WILL HARM ASYLUM SEEKERS AND REFUGEES WHO ARE JUST SIMPLY TRYING TO FLEE FOR THEIR LIVES AND GET THE PROTECTION IN THE UNITED STATES THEY NEED.

>> I DON'T MEAN TO BE SCENICAL, ESPECIALLY IN THE FACE OF WHAT YOU DESCRIBED YOUR CLIENTS GO THROUGH AND CERTAINLY, WE'VE HEARD SO MANY STORIES FROM PEOPLE THEMSELVES AND YET, THIS DELAY, THE FACT THAT IT WILL BE CHALLENGED IN COURTS AND PROBABLY STRUCK DOWN, DOES THIS NOT PLAY INTO ADMINISTRATION'S HAND?

IT BUYS THEM TIME, RIGHT?

IF THEY KNOW IT WILL BE STRUCK DOWN, THEY MAY GO FORWARD WITH IT ANYWAY.

>> WHY PROPOSE IT IN THE FIRST PLACE?

RIGHT?

THAT'S WHAT I THINK -- >> WHY DO YOU THINK?

>> I REALLY DON'T KNOW.

IT GOES -- IT'S IN DIRECT CONTRAST TO EVERYTHING THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION SAID IN ITS CAMPAIGN AND THIS IS CERTAINLY NOT THE KIND OF WELCOMING AMERICA THAT BIDEN PROMISED WHEN HE WAS RUNNING FOR OFFICE AND SO WE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE NEED TO WORK TOGETHER TO COMMENT WHEN THIS COMMENT PERIOD BECOMES AVAILABLE TO US.

>> NOW, I DO WANT TO GET TO THE RESPONSE FROM THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION.

IN FACT, HOME LAND SECURITY MAYORKAS SAYS WE'RE A NATION OF IMMIGRANTS AND WE ARE A NATION OF LAWS.

WE ARE STRENGTHENING THE AVAILABILITY OF LEGAL ORDERLY PATHWAYS FOR MIGRANTS TO COME TO THE UNITED STATES AT THE SAME TIME PROPOSING NEW CONSEQUENCES ON THOSE WHO FAIL TO USE PROCESSES MADE AVAILABLE TO THEM BY THE UNITED STATES AND ITS REGIONAL PARTNERS.

WHY WON'T THAT WORK FOR YOUR PARTNERS?

WHY ISN'T THAT ENOUGH?

>> SO, THE AMERICAN IMMIGRATION LAWYER'S ASSOCIATION AND MOST IMMIGRATION ADVOCATES THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY UNDERSTAND THAT WHEN AN IMMIGRANT OR IN THIS CASE AN ASYLUM SEEKER TRIES TO NAVIGATE THE COMPLEX ASYLUM SYSTEM AND THE ASYLUM LAWS WITHOUT THE ASSISTANCE OF AN ATTORNEY, THEY ARE ALMOST TOTALLY DOOMED.

THERE ARE STATISTICS THAT UP TO 95% OF ALL ASYLUM APPLICATIONS ARE DENIED BY PRO SE APPLICANTS, WHICH ARE APPLICANTS FOR ASYLUM WITHOUT AN ATTORNEY BECAUSE THE SYSTEM IS JUST TOO COMPLEX FOR MOST PEOPLE.

I'M A LAWYER AND IT'S COMPLEX FOR ME AND I DO THIS EVERY DAY FOR A LIVING AND MOST OF MY CLIENTS DO NOT HAVE THE EDUCATION LEVEL THAT I HAVE.

THEY'RE COMING TO THE UNITED STATES SPEAKING A DIFFERENT LANGUAGE, MANY TIMES THEY DO NOT SPEAK ENGLISH AND THEY ARE EXPECTED TO THEN NAVIGATE THE COMPLEX ASYLUM SYSTEM OF THE UNITED STATES AND TRY TO REBUT A PRESUMPTION AGAINST THEM WHEN THEY DON'T -- IN MOST CASES, THEY WILL NOT HAVE THE ASSISTANCE OF AN ATTORNEY AND WILL BE MOVED BACK TO THE HOME COUNTRY THEY WERE FLEEING AND POTENTIALLY KILLED.

>> THIS IS CLEARLY HITTING A NERVE EVEN WITH DEMOCRATS THEMSELVES FOR A PROMINENT DEMOCRATIC SENATOR PUTTING OUT A STATEMENT SAYING THEY FIND IT DEEPLY DISAPPOINT POINTING AND YET, YOU ALSO HAVE THE OTHER SIDE.

THE DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSMAN FROM ONE FROM TEXAS SAYING LOOK, THERE ARE COMPELLING REASONS FOR A NEW STRATEGY AT THE BORDER AND I KNOW, ANDREA THAT YOU'VE SEEN THIS YOURSELF, RIGHT?

THESE COMMUNITIES ARE STRUGGLING, THE MAYORS, MANY OF THEM DEMOCRATIC SAY WE CAN'T DEAL WITH 400,000 A MONTH, LET ALONE 5 MILLION A YEAR.

SO WHAT DO YOU PROPOSE THE SOLUTION IS.

>> THERE ARE MANY OPTIONS.

THE AMERICAN IMMIGRATION SYSTEM HAS AN ENTIRE WEBSITE DEDICATED TO THIS.

IN SOME, IT IS IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND THE FIXING THE IMMIGRATION SYSTEM TO BE BEGIN WITH WHICH IS OUTDATED AND ANTIQUATED, WE WILL NOT SEE ANY CHANCE UNTIL WE FIX IT.

ALSO, SUPPORTING THE JUSTICE SYSTEMS OF THE SENDING COUNTRIES SO THAT THERE IS JUSTICE AND RULE OF LAW AND THAT THE PEOPLE WHO ARE CURRENTLY FLEEING HAVE A SAFER AND MORE JUST SOCIETY TO LIVE IN.

THOSE ARE REALLY WHAT WE WOULD NEED TO DO IN ORDER TO STEM OR CURVE THIS REFUGEE.

>> IS THERE ANY REALISTIC HOPE OF THAT?

YOU SAID IT YOURSELF, IT'S BEEN THE REGAN ADMINISTRATION SINCE WE'VE SEEN THIS.

WHAT DO YOU SEE ON THE GROUND THAT WOULD BRING WHAT IS A COMMON CAUSE REALLY TO GET AN ORDERLY BASIS OF IMMIGRATION IN THE UNITED STATES AND DONE?

>> IT HAS TO BE BOTH PARTIES WORKING TOGETHER AND I'M IN KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI.

WE HAVE A VERY PURPLE CITY AND RED STATE AND I AM OFTEN WORKING WITH MY FRIENDS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE TO WORK TOGETHER AND WE ARE ADVOCATING FOR COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION REFORM BUT THAT HAS TO BE DONE BY BOTH HOUSES AND PARTIES WORKING TOGETHER TO FIND A SOLUTION TO THIS PROBLEM BECAUSE OTHERWISE IT WILL CONTINUE.

REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS MUST WORK TOGETHER AND AT THIS POINT, IT WOULD BE THE BEST FOR OUR ECONOMY AND THE UNITED STATES TO HAVE A FUNCTIONING IMMIGRATION SYSTEM SO THAT WE CAN HAVE THE WORKERS THAT WE NEED.

WE CAN PROVIDE THE PROTECTION THAT THE ASYLUM LAWS REQUIRE AND ALSO, WE CAN STOP SENDING BUSINESSES OVERSEAS AND HAVE THE WORK DONE IN THE UNITED STATES.

THERE ARE SO MANY BENEFITS TO IMMIGRATION REFORM.

>> YOU MAKE A GOOD POINT.

SOME CEOs SAID IF YOU WANT TO HELP THE ECONOMY, YOU SHOULD CERTAINLY ENGAGE IN A ROBUST DISCUSS -- DISCUSSION ABOUT IMMIGRATION REFORM TO HELP THE ECONOMY.

CONGRESSMAN QUAYAR A DEMOCRAT SAY PEOPLE ROMANTICIZE IT AND WE COULD BE A PROBLEM IF THERE IS A SOLUTION TO THIS.

AND THAT THESE ARE BAND-AIDS THAT WORKED IN THE SHORT TERM BECAUSE THE LONG-TERM PROPOSAL MAY NOT HAPPEN.

>> THAT IS WHY WE HAVE TO EXPAND THE ASYLUM OFFICERS AND DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITIES RESOURCES AT THE SOUTHERN BORDER SO THAT THERE IS A JUST AND FAIR ASYLUM PROCESS TO INCLUDE INCREASING THE AMOUNT OF ASYLUM OFFICERS WHO ARE TRAMA INFORMED TO BE ABLE TO WORK THROUGH THE ASYLUM BACKLOG.

WITHOUT ADDITIONAL RESOURCES AND ADDITIONAL ASYLUM OFFICES AT THE SOUTHERN BORDER, THERE WILL CONTINUE TO BE THE PIECEMEAL, YOU MIGHT CATCH ONE PERSON AND MULTIPLE PEOPLE GET DIFFERENT KINDS OF RESPONSES AND DIFFERENT KINDS OF TREATMENT, WE HAVE TO HAVE A STREAM LINED SYSTEM AND WELL EDUCATED ASYLUM OFFICERS BUT RIGHT NOW THE AMOUNT OF ASYLUM OFFICERS AT THE BORDER IS NOT KEEPING UP WITH DEMAND.

THAT IS THE FIRST THING THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION COULD DO AND THAT'S A BUDGET PROCESS TO WORK TOGETHER TO AT THIS POINT THAT'S THE FIRST THING WE CAN >> YOU KNOW, WE HEARD FROM BEN WEDEMAN'S REPORT FROM ITALY, AS WELL SOME HAVE DRAWN REALLY DISTURBING COMPARISONS TO THE TREATMENT OF THE UKRAINIAN REFUGEES.

MORE THAN A QUARTER MILLION HAVE BEEN GRANTED ASYLUM STATUS HERE IN THE UNITED STATES.

DOES IT CONCERN YOU?

DO YOU BELIEVE THERE IS BUY USE THERE AT THE SOUTHERN BORDER?

>> NO, I DON'T.

I THINK THE UNITED STATES IS TRYING TO DO ITS BEST WITH THE MULTIPLE FIRES GOING OFF AT THE SAME TIME.

I THINK WHAT WE'RE DOING AS A NATION IS ATTEMPTING TO HELP THE HUMANITARIAN CRISIS BOTH IN UKRAINE, I'M ALSO SEEING A LOT OF VENEZUELANS AND PEOPLE FROM AFGHANISTAN STILL THAT ARE WORKING THROUGH THE PAROLE PROCESS BUT THERE IS JUST SIMPLY NOT ENOUGH IMMIGRATION OFFICERS ACROSS THE BOARD AND THERE IS SO MUCH DEMAND FOR PROTECTION IN THIS GREAT COUNTRY BECAUSE IT IS A COUNTRY OF LAW.

IT IS A COUNTRY THAT FOLLOWS THE LAW AND THAT'S WHY THIS BIDEN ADMINISTRATION PROPOSED RULE MUST BE STRUCK DOWN BECAUSE IT IS SIMPLY IN CONTRAST TO THE LAW THAT THE UNITED STATES, I THINK, IS ATTEMPTING TO FOLLOW.

SO I THINK THIS IS REALLY A QUESTION OF RESOURCES RIGHT NOW AND IT'S ABOUT GETTING THE RESOURCES NECESSARY TO THE SOUTHERN BORDER.

>> YOU KNOW, SOME HAVE DESCRIBED YOU AS A WORRIER IN THIS IMMIGRATION DEBATE.

YOU SAY YOU WERE INJURED IN FACT WITH U.S. OFFICIALS IN 2018.

IT WAS CAPTURED IN THAT NETFLIX DOCUMENTARY THAT SOME PEOPLE MAY HAVE SEEN "LIVING UNDOCUMENTED."

I HAVE TO ASK YOU, HAVING BEEN THROUGH THIS FOR SO MANY YEARS, SHOWING THE DOCUMENTARY NOW, WHAT ARE THE PERSONAL STORIES THAT STILL STICK WITH YOU BECAUSE YOU KIND OF GET LOST IN THE NUMBERS HERE SOMETIMES AND FORGET THAT LIVES ARE AT STAKE.

>> AND THAT'S WHAT I ALWAYS TELL PEOPLE WHEN ASKED.

WE HAVE TO REMEMBER THAT THESE ARE NOT POLITICAL PAWNS.

THESE ARE HUMANS.

I HAVE THE GREAT BLESSING OF BEING ABLE TO SERVE THESE AMAZING SURVIVORS EVERY DAY FOR A LIVING.

BUT I DO SEE THAT THEY ARE PEOPLE WHO HAVE SUFFERED A LOT AND TO EXPERIENCE SUFFERING NOT ONLY IN ROUTE TO THE UNITED STATES BUT ONCE THEY GET HERE IS WHAT I THINK JUST REALLY BREAKS MY HEART THE MOST BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT THAT'S NOT THE AMERICA THAT WE WANT AS A NATION AND THAT WE BELIEVE IN.

I JUST FEEL SO THANKFUL THAT WHEN MY -- WHEN MY ANCESTORS CAME FROM NORTHERN EUROPE, THE RULES WERE DIFFERENT.

YOU JUST HAD TO SHOW YOU DIDN'T HAVE TUBERCULOSIS AND THEN YOU COULD COME IN.

NOW, THINGS ARE MORE COMPLEX.

THE RULES HAVE CHANGED.

WE HAVE TO MAKE THE UNITED STATES A WELCOMING PLACE AND LAW IN LINE WITH OUR CURRENT ECONOMIC DEMANDS, NOT A LAW FROM THE '80s BEFORE THERE WAS INTERNET AND ANY OF US HAD CELL PHONES, WE HAVE TO MAKE THE IMMIGRATION LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES MEET TODAY'S ECONOMIC MEK DEMANDS AND THAT WILL HELP MY CLIENTS WE SEE EVERY DAY THAT WANT A CHANCE, THE SAME CHANCE MY ANCESTORS GOT HUNDREDS OF YEARS AGO AND NOW, WHEN I GET TO DO THAT FOR A CLIENT, WHEN I GET TO SEE A GENERATION CHANGE, PEOPLE PROTECTED THANKS IS TRULY WHY I FEEL LIKE IT'S A CALLING AND IT'S WHAT BRINGS ME JOY AND I'M SO GRATEFUL TO BE ABLE TO KNOW THE PEOPLE I KNOW AND SERVE THE PEOPLE I SERVE BECAUSE THEY'RE HEROES.

>> WE WILL INDEED CONTINUE TO FOLLOW THIS STORY AS THIS PROPOSED BAN MAKES ITS WAY THROUGH THIS CONSULTATION PERIOD.

ANDREA MARTINEZ, THANKS SO MUCH.

>>> NOW TO A SUBJECT WHICH IS AGAIN OFTEN THE SOURCE OF AN INCREDIBLY POLARIZING DEBATE AND THAT IN TRUTH IS DEEPLY NUANCED, AS WELL.

MEDICAL ASSISTANCE IN DYING.

IT HAS BEEN LEGAL IN CANADA FOR SIX YEARS NOW AND INCREASINGLY USED TO RENDER MERCY IN THE FINAL MOMENTS OF LIE.

CURRENTLY ONLY PEOPLE WITH A SERIOUS IRREVERSIBLE CONDITION ARE ELIGIBLE FOR THE PROGRAM THERE AND IT'S KNOWN AS MAID BUT AN EXPANSION OF THE LAW WOULD INCLUDE THOSE WITH MENTAL ILLNESS AND THAT, AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, IS RAISING CONCERNS AND THE GOVERNMENT DECIDED IT WOULD BE PRUDENT TO TEMPORARILY DELAY IT.

SO WE'LL GO THROUGH SOME OF THE ISSUES INVOLVED HERE AND WHAT IT COULD MEAN FOR END OF LIFE CARE RIGHT AROUND THE WORLD.

DR. MADELEINE LEE IS A PSYCHIATRIST WHO HELPED HUNDREDS OF PATIENTS THROUGH MEDICALLY ASSISTED DEATHS AND LED THE UNIVERSITY HEALTH NETWORK'S MADE PROGRAM.

SHE JOINS US NOW LIVE FROM TORONTO AND I THANK YOU FOR BEING WITH US ON WHAT IS A VERY DIFFICULT SUBJECT FOR SO MANY FAMILIES, LET ALONE GOVERNMENTS TRYING TO GRAPPLE WITH THIS.

IT'S IMPORTANT AS YOU HAD THE BENEFIT OF YOUR EXPERIENCE TO EXPLAIN TO US, WHAT IS ASSISTED DYING?

WHAT DOES THE LAW IN CANADA ALLOW FOR IT?

WHY DOES IT WORK AND WHY IS IT NECESSARY IN SOME CASES?

>> THANK YOU FOR THE INVITATION TO SPEAK ON THIS CHALLENGING TOPIC.

THE WAY MEDICAL ASSISTANCE IN DYING OR MAID IN CANADA WORKS NOW IS YOU HAVE TO HAVE -- YOU HAVE TO BE A COMPETENT ADULT WHO HAS SOMETHING CALLED A GRIEVANCE IRREVERSIBLE MEDICAL CONDITION, IT HAS TO BE INCURABLE AND ADVANCED STATE OF DECLINE AND CAPABILITY AND FUNCTIONS AND HAVE PHYSICAL OR PSYCHOLOGICAL SUFFERING UNRELIVBLE BY ANY MEANS.

YOU USED TO NEED A FORESEEABLE DEATH NOT WELL DEFINED BUT BECAUSE OF COURT CHALLENGES, THAT WAS REMOVED IN 2021 AND NOW THE GOVERNMENT HAS TWO TRACKS FOR ACCESS TO MAID ONE WHERE YOU HAVE A FORESEEABLE NATURAL DEATH AND ONE YOU DON'T THAT IS HIGHLY SAFEGUARDED AND TWO CLINICIANS AND IN CANADA IT CAN BE A MEDICAL DOCTOR OR NURSE PRACTITIONER ASSESS YOU AGAINST THOSE ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA AND IF YOU HAVE THEM, WE CAN PROVIDE MAID TO YOU BY GIVING AN IV OR PRESCRIBING AN ORAL MEDICATION YOU TAKE YOURSELF.

>> AND YOU AS WE SAY ARE A PRACTITIONER IN THIS.

THE LAW IN CANADA AS YOU SAY WAS EXPANDED IN THE LAST FEW YEARS BUT MADE A PROFOUND IMPACT.

HOW HAS THE RIGHT TO DIE AFFECTED YOU AS A DOCTOR AND AS WELL AS THE PATIENTS, THE PATIENT STORIES, YOU KNOW, THAT COME THROUGH YOUR LIFE EVERY DAY?

>> BOY, THAT'S A BIG QUESTION.

YOU KNOW, I -- THE LAW HAS CHANGED OVER TIME AND I WOULD SAY EVEN WHEN IT FIRST STARTED, I WAS A LITTLE UNCOMFORTABLE WITH HAVING IT BECAUSE I WASN'T SURE ABOUT THE NEED.

YOU KNOW, I'M A CANCER PSYCHIATRIST THAT WORKS IN END OF LIFE CARE AND I FELT THAT WE HAVE IN CANADA GOOD CARE AND MOST PEOPLE WHO RECEIVE MADE HAVE RECEIVED GOOD CARE SO THEY'RE NOT PHYSICALLY SUFFERING.

MOST OF IT IS PSYCHOLOGICAL SUFFERING AND THAT IS MY VOCATION.

THAT'S WHAT I DO.

I HELP PEOPLE WITH END OF LIFE SUFFERING.

I LEARNED TO BE COMFORTABLE WITH IT SO YOU ASKED EARLIER WHAT IS THE NEED?

I HAVE CERTAINLY SEEN PATIENTS WHO BENEFIT FROM HAVING THE OPTION OF MAID.

THERE IS SOMETHING ABOUT BEING ABLE TO CONTROL THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF YOUR DEATH THAT IS MORE QUICKLY AND POWERFULLY THERAPEUTIC THAN ANYTHING ELSE.

THERE IS A CERTAIN PORTION AND IT'S A MINORITY BUT THERE IS A CERTAIN GROUP OF PATIENTS WHO REALLY BENEFIT THERAPEUTICALLY AND I SEEN THERE IS A NEED FOR IT.

>> SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT MUCH LESS -- SORRY TO INTERRUPT.

YOU'RE SAYING AUTONOMY AT THE END OF LIFE CAN BE THERAPEUTIC IN DEATH?

>> I THINK A LOT OF PATIENTS FEEL THAT THEIR DISEASE IS TAKING AWAY THEIR CONTROL.

I'D ACTUALLY SAY MY EXPERIENCE HAS BEEN -- THAT'S THE PRIMARY PSYCHOLOGICAL DRIVER FOR WANTING MAID FOR PATIENTS BECAUSE THEY WANT CONTROL BACK, YES.

AND THEN HAVING THE OPTION IS THERAPEUTIC.

>> OKAY.

SO THAT'S WHERE THE LAW RESTS NOW.

THE DEBATE, THOUGH, FOR IT GOING FURTHER HAS BEEN, YOU KNOW, VIS REAL AND FOR GOOD REASON, RIGHT?

WE SHOULD POINT OUT THERE IS NO RIGHT AND WRONG HERE.

THESE DECISIONS REST ON A CONTINUING AND PERSONAL DECISIONS.

YOU'VE BEEN FRANK THE EXPANSION OF THE LAW TO INCLUDE MENTAL ILLNESS WORRIES YOU.

JUST EXPLAIN SOME OF YOUR REASONS WHY.

>> I'D QUALIFY THAT A LITTLE, ACTUALLY.

IT'S NOT JUST EXPANSION TO MENTAL ILLNESS BUT IN 2021 IT EXPANDED TO NON-TERMINAL ILLNESS.

I THINK WHEN MAID WAS FIRST INTRODUCED, THE THOUGHT IS THIS IS ALL THOSE CRITERIA I DESCRIBED, DESCRIBED SOMEBODY ON A TRAJECTORY TOWARDS THE END OF LIFE AND RESTRICTED TO END OF LIFE CONDITIONS.

IN 2021 IT CLEARLY OPENED UP TO PEOPLE WITH CHRONIC ILLNESS AND THAT'S WHERE I STARTED TO BECOME UNCOMFORTABLE BECAUSE IT'S A DIFFERENT CIRCUMSTANCE IF YOU APPLY MAID.

IF YOU'RE GOING TO GIVE ASSISTED DYING TO SOMEBODY WHO IS ALREADY DYING AND WOULD DIE WHETHER YOU GAVE THEM MAID OR NOT, THAT IS ONE THING.

IT'S QUITE SOMETHING ELSE TO END THE LIFE OF SOMEBODY WHO WOULDN'T OTHERWISE DIE AND SO I STRUGGLED A LITTLE MORE WITH THAT IN 2021.

THE EXPANSION TO MENTAL ILLNESS IS PART OF THAT.

IF YOU'RE GOING TO ALLOW MAID FOR PEOPLE WITH CHRONIC DISEASE, THEN YOU REALLY CAN'T STIGMATIZE AND EXCEPTIONALIZE MENTAL ILLNESS BUT THERE ARE EXTRA CONSIDERATIONS AROUND MENTAL ILLNESS WHICH IS WHY THE GOVERNMENT PUT A TWO-YEAR HOLD ON IT.

THEY'VE EXTENDED FOR A FURTHER YEAR.

>> YOU SAY, YOU STRUGGLED AND MADE VERY GOOD POINTS THERE.

CAN YOU LET US INTO BEDSIDE CONVERSATIONS THAT OBVIOUSLY HAVE GIVEN YOU PAUSE?

>> SO THE OPPONENTS TO EXPANSION TO MENTAL ILLNESS TALK ABOUT HOW HARD IT IS TO KNOW WHEN A MENTAL DISORDER IS ACTUALLY INCURABLE OR IRREMEDIABLE, THAT WE DON'T HAVE A GOOD SCIENCE TO SAY WHEN TREATMENT IS FUTILE.

I'M NOT SURE THAT'S THE MAIN ISSUE.

THAT IS TRUE BUT ACTUALLY, OUR LAW ALLOWS PATIENTS TO REFUSE TREATMENT AND TO ME, THAT'S ONE OF THE PROBLEMS WITH OUR LAW.

OUR LAW DOESN'T REQUIRE A PATIENT TO ACCEPT TREATMENT THAT IS AVAILABLE.

I THINK THE BIGGER CHALLENGE IS HOW DO YOU -- HOW DO YOU ASSESS SOMEBODY FOR CAPACITY TO CHOOSE TO DIE WHEN SUICIDE IS A COMMON PART OF A MENTAL DISORDER?

WE DON'T REALLY HAVE GOOD FRAME WORKS HOW TO DO THIS AND THE OTHER REASON THE GOVERNMENT DELAYED THE EXPANSION IS THE HEALTH SYSTEM ISN'T PREPARED TO DO THIS IN TERMS OF BALANCING PATIENTS' RIGHTS TO ACCESS MAID FOR MENTAL DISORDERS BUT THERE IS VERY LIMITED ACCESS TO MENTAL HEALTH TREATMENT.

AND SO IT'S NOT CLEAR WHAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO DO WHEN A PATIENT ACTUALLY WANTS TREATMENT BUT CAN'T ACCESS IT AND THEY'RE ELIGIBLE FOR MAID BUT THEN DO WE APPROVE THEM FOR IT BECAUSE THEY CAN'T ACCESS TREATMENT?

THOSE ARE THE STRUGGLES.

>> THE STRUGGLE IS REAL AS THEY SAY.

THE GOVERNMENT WILL CONTINUE TO LOOK AT THIS NOW.

THEY'RE SAYING FOR AT LEAST A YEAR.

WE SHOULD POINT OUT THAT IN CANADA MOST OF THIS IS PUBLIC MEDICINE, RIGHT?

PEOPLE AREN'T PAYING FOR THIS AS PART OF THE PUBLICLY FUNDED MEDICAL SYSTEM AND YET, AT THIS POINT, WHAT MORE NEEDS TO BE PUT IN PLACE?

BECAUSE AS YOU SAY, THE FEAR IS THAT PEOPLE THAT CANNOT ACCESS MENTAL HEALTH SUPPORT THAT THEY NEED, THAT THEY'RE ENTITLED TO WILL THEN INSTEAD OPT FOR MAID.

>> SO I ACTUALLY ALSO THINK IT'S A BIT OF A RED HERRING THAT PART OF THE PREPARING THE HEALTH SYSTEM IS ENSURING ACCESS TO MENTAL HEALTH CARE COMPLETELY.

WE'LL NEVER BE ABLE TO PROVIDE ENOUGH MENTAL HEALTH CARE TO MAKE MAID SAFE.

IT'S NOT A SAFE PRACTICE BUT SAFER PRACTICE.

WE HAVE TO RECOGNIZE THERE IS ALWAYS A TRADEOFF IN A SYSTEM THAT PRIORITIZES AUTONOMY, THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME PEOPLE THAT QUALIFY AND RECEIVE MAID WHEN ARGUABLY THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE AND IF YOU ON THE OTHER SIDE PRIORITIZE PROTECTION OF PATIENTS, THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME PEOPLE LEFT TO SUFFER LONGER THAN THEY WOULD WANT.

WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT WHICH ERRORS WE'RE GOING TO MAKE ON EITHER SIDE.

YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT THE WAY TO SAFEGUARD THAT, MAKE IT SAFER A LITTLE IS MAKE SURE CLINICIANS ARE ASSESSING WELL AND FOR CLINICIAN TO DO THAT, THEY NEED THE LAW TO GIVE THEM ADEQUATE SAFEGUARDS TO APPLY.

SO I THINK THERE ARE MANY THINGS THAT CAN HAPPEN IN THIS NEXT YEAR.

I THINK FOR SURE, WE ARE ALREADY WORKING ON PRACTICE GUIDELINES FOR HOW TO APPLY MAID MORE SAFELY.

WE'RE DEVELOPING A STANDARDIZED EDUCATIONAL CURRICULUM TO CHANGE BECAUSE WHEN MAID WAS FIRST INTRODUCED, WE DIDN'T KNOW HOW TO DO THIS.

WE WERE STARTING BLIND TO IT AND THERE WERE PROBLEMATIC CASES.

THOSE MATERIALS ARE ALMOST READY.

WE NEED TIME TO IMPLEMENT THEM.

WE'LL DO THAT OVER THE NEXT YEAR.

I'M HOPING THERE WILL BE TIME OVER THE NEXT YEAR FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO RECONSIDER LEGISLATION.

CANADA HAS A UNIQUE LEGISLATION IN IT'S VERY PATCH WORK AND EVOLVED OVER TIME AND LEFT HUGE GAPS IN TERMS OF SAFETY AND I THINK OUR LEGISLATION RIGHT NOW IS VERY AUTONOMY FOCUSED AND DOESN'T HAVE ENOUGH OF A CLINICAL LENS THAT ALLOWS THE CLINICIANS PROVIDING THIS TO PROTECT THEIR PATIENTS.

>> YOU MAKE A FORCEFUL ARGUMENT THERE FOR THE SAFEGUARDS AS YOU SAID AS A CLINICIAN, IT'S UNDENIABLE AND STUNNING YOU SAY OF COURSE, ERRORS WILL BE MADE IN ONE DIRECTION OR THE OTHER AND THAT'S JUST THE FALLIBILITY OF ALL OF US.

THE POINT IN CANADA WILL CONTINUE TO RESONATE AROUND THE WORLD.

ONE GROUP OPPOSED TO THE EXPANSION IN CANADA, QUITE ADDRESSING THE CANADIANS FOR INCLUSION CITIZENSHIP, HE DESCRIBED CANADA'S LAW AS PROBABLY THE BIGGEST THREAT TO DISABLED PEOPLE SINCE THE NAZI PROGRAM IN GERMANY IN THE 1930s.

SOME PEOPLE SAID LOOK, FROM THE OUTSIDE LOOKING INTO CANADA HERE THAT THIS ALMOST SEEMS DYSTOPIAN IN PRACTICE.

>> I DESCRIBED IT NOT AS DRAMATIC AS THAT BUT A BRAVE NEW WORLD WHETHER IT'S INSPIRED OR DYSTOPIAN IT CAN BE BOTH.

I THINK FOR SURE THERE ARE CONCERNS FROM DISABILITIES GROUPS ABOUT HOW WE'RE APPLYING THE LAWS.

I THINK THOSE ARE VALID CONCERNS.

I ALSO THINK THERE IS A VALID REASON WHY MAID SHOULD EXIST AND THAT THERE ARE WAYS IF WE CAN MORE -- WE CAN PROVIDE THE TRAINING AND BETTER SAFEGUARD THE LAW ITSELF, WE CAN THINK ABOUT THIS CAREFULLY, THAT HOPEFULLY WE CAN DECIDE WHAT DOES SOCIETY WANT TO PRIORITIZE, AUTONOMY OR PROTECTION?

AND THEN THERE ARE WAYS OF MAKING THIS FIT INTO THE VALUE SYSTEM.

>> YOU KNOW, AT ITS CORE, THERE IS DIGNITY AND SOMETIMES PEOPLE SAY I'M SURE YOU'VE SEEN IT YOURSELF, BEAUTY IN DYING AND SOME PEOPLE HAVE DESCRIBED THAT.

I WONDER IF YOU CAN TAKE US TO THE BEDSIDE AGAIN.

YOU HAVE BEEN CANDID ABOUT THE FACT THAT YOU'VE BEEN A PRACTITIONER AND AT TIMES HAVE BEEN UNSETTLED BY WHAT HAS BEEN DONE AS A CLINICIAN OBVIOUSLY WITH THE WISHES OF THE PATIENT INCLUDED BUT TAKE US TO THE BED SIDE.

WHAT ARE THOSE WRENCHING DECISIONS NOT JUST FOR THE PEOPLE SEEKING AUTONOMY BUT FAMILY AROUND THEM?

>> I THINK WE'VE HEARD ABOUT THE CHALLENGING CASES IN THE NEWS.

THEY'VE BEEN IN THE NEWS FOR THE LAST FEW MONTHS WHO HAVE CONCERNS PATIENTS ARE NOT BEING PROPERLY ASSESSED, THAT THERE IS A MENTAL DISORDER.

MY EXPERIENCE HAS BEEN -- I WANT TO EMPHASIZE THE VAST MAJORITY OF MAID CASES ARE MEANINGFUL AND BENEFICIAL TO THE PATIENTS.

AT THE BEDSIDE ONE OF MY FIRST CASES WAS A NUN WHO BECAME A PHILOSOPHY PROFESSOR AND RECORDED A VIDEO FOR US TALKING ABOUT HOW MUCH -- I MEAN, THIS IS A WOMAN WITH A PHD AND STILL TEACHING AT THE AGE OF 80 AND TALKED ABOUT HOW MUCH HER INTELLECT MEANT TO HER AND THE CANCER WAS TAKING AWAY BITS OF WHO SHE WAS EVERY DAY AND WHAT IT MEANT TO HER TO BE ABLE TO DIE WITH HER COGNITIVE FACULTIES IN TACT.

THERE IS NO OTHER INTERVENTION TO GIVE IT TO HER.

NO OTHER MEDICATION OR COUNSELING WOULD LET HER RETAIN TO DIE WITH HER COGNITIVE FACULTIES.

I THINK -- I DON'T WANT TO UNDER ESTIMATE OR MAKE PEOPLE THINK THAT IT ISN'T A POSITIVE FOR MANY PATIENTS WHO CHOOSE IT.

ON THE OTHER HAND, WE'VE HEARD ALL THESE CASES THAT ARE IN THE NEWS.

YOU KNOW, I MIGHT EVEN DESCRIBE A CASE OR A SCENARIO THAT HAVE BEEN DISTAUPE YA WITH THE LAW AND CLINICIANS INVOLVED.

WITH WE HAD EARLY ON ELDERLY WOMAN AFTER A FALL OR THE EXACERBATION OF CHRONIC DESTRUCTIVE PULMONARY DISEASE WHERE THEY RECOVERED FROM THE MEDICAL CONDITION BUT SAID I HAD ENOUGH.

I DON'T WANT TO GET ANY OLDER.

I DON'T WANT TO GO TO A NURSING HOME AND APPLY FOR MAID.

MANY CLINICIANS ASSESSED THEM AND SAID YOU'RE NOT PARTICULARLY FRAIL.

NOTHING WILL END YOUR LIFE SOON.

THEY DON'T QUALIFY.

THEY WERE VERY UPSET BY THIS THAT THEIR AUTONOMY WAS VIOLATED AND THEY GOT APPEALED AND GOT OTHER ASSESSORS THAT FOUND PEOPLE THAT SAID YOU DO QUALIFY.

IN MANY WAYS, THOSE ARE EQUIVALENT TO WHAT WE WOULD CALL COMPLETED LIFE OR TIRED OF LIFE CASES THAT ARE CONTROVERSIAL EVEN IN THE NETHERLANDS WHERE LAWS ARE LIBERAL.

IN CANADA, THOSE CASES ARE HAPPENING.

IT'S A QUESTION OF DO WE THINK THEY SHOULD BE?

>> RIGHT.

>> IS THAT AN APPROPRIATE REASON?

>> WE DO HAVE TO LEAVE IT THERE FOR NOW BUT THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR GIVING US WHAT IS IMPORTANT INSIGHT FOR PEOPLE AROUND THE WORLD TO UNDERSTAND WHAT CANADA IS GRAPPLING WITH AT THIS MOMENT AND YOU AS A PRACTITIONER.

DR. LEE, THANK YOU.

>>> TO THE BACK POWER MOVEMENT AND THE YEAR THAT REDEFINED A 1966 JOURNALIST EXPLORING THAT MOMENTOUS YEAR AND THE PEOPLE THAT SHAPED IT IN HIS NEW BOOK "SAYING IT LOUD."

HE JOINS WALTER ISAACSON TO EXPLAIN.

>> MARK WHITAKER, THANKS FOR JOINING US SHOW.

>> THANKS FOR HAVING ME.

>> THE BLACK POWER MOVEMENT, THE BLACK PANTHERS HAS THIS AMAZING CENTRAL CHARACTER OF COURSE STOKELY CARMICHAEL.

TELL ME ABOUT HIM.

>> STOKELY CARMICHAEL WAS BORN IN THE CARIBBEAN AND RAISED IN NEW YORK.

HE WANT TO HOWARD UNIVERSITY AND BECAME INVOLVED WITH ACTIVISM THERE.

HE WAS AN ORGANIZER IN THE DEEP SOUTH REGISTERING BLACKS TO VOTE IN MISSISSIPPI AND ALABAMA.

AND THEN IN EARLY 19 -- IN THE SPRING OF 1966 AT A RETREAT, A SNAKE RETREAT OUTSIDE OF TENNESSEE WHERE JOHN LEWIS WHO HAD BEEN THE CHAIRMAN WAS EXPECTING TO BE EASILY REELECTED -- >> WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE STUDENT NON-VIOLATING COORDINATING COMMITTEE RAISING FROM 1965 ON WARD AS A CIVIL RIGHTS GROUP.

>> EXACTLY.

FORMED BY YOUNG PEOPLE THAT HAD COME OUT OF THE SIT IN MOVEMENT IN THE SOUTH AND EARLY '60s.

AND JOHN LEWIS, YOU KNOW, WAS A NATIONAL FIGURE AT THIS POINT AFTER BEING BEATEN ON THE ED EDMOND PETTIS BRIDGE EXPECTING TO BE REELECTED AND A REVOTE IS DEMANDED AND THIS -- THERE IS A WILD SCENE IN WHICH IT'S A WHOLE CHAPTER IN MY BOOK OF THIS NIGHT LONG MEETING AND INCREASINGLY HEATED VOTE THAT -- AND DISCUSSION THAT GOES UNTIL DAWN AND THEN FINALLY IN THE SECOND VOTE, STOKELY CARMICHAEL IS ELECTED THE NEW CHAIRMAN.

REPRESENTING A MESSAGE THAT CRUSHED JOHN LEWIS AND PUT STOKELY ALL OF A SUDDEN NOT A WELL-KNOWN FIGURE AT THAT TIME ON THE NATIONAL MAP.

>> YOU TALK ABOUT THE MEETING IN TENNESSEE IN NEW KINGSTON.

WHAT WAS THE DIFFERENCE?

>> STOKELY WAS CLOSE TO DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING AND HIS VISION OF INTEGRATION AND TACTICS OF NON-VIOLENCE AND BEEN INVITED TO MEET WITH PRESIDENT JOHNSON AND SO THERE WAS THIS MORE MILITANT FACTION BY 1966 THAT WAS QUESTIONING ALL OF THAT AND ALSO THOUGHT THAT JOHN LEWIS WAS SORT OF OUT OF TOUCH WITH IT ALL AND, YOU KNOW, STOKELY WAS -- STOOD FOR A COUPLE OF THINGS.

ONE WAS, YOU KNOW, QUESTIONING WHETHER THE WHOLE VISION AND AGENDA OF INTEGRATION REALLY, YOU KNOW, WAS WORKING AND ALSO.

WHETHER BLACKS SHOULD BE NECESSARILY ALWAYS COMMITTED UNCONDITIONALLY TO NON-VIOLENCE, THAT BLACK FOLKS, POOR BLACK FOLKS IN THE SOUTH AND URBAN NORTH WHEN CONFRONTED WITH VIOLENCE PERHAPS SHOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO DEFEND THEMSELVES.

>> YOU TALK ABOUT NON-VIOLENCE.

LET ME READ A SENTENCE OF YOUR BOOK TO THE HEART OF THAT.

IT STOKELY CARMICHAEL SAYING OF DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING, HE MADE ONLY ONE ASSUMPTION IN ORDER FOR NON-VIOLENCE TO WORK, YOUR OPPONENT HAS TO HAVE A CONSCIENCE.

THE UNITED STATES DOES NOT HAVE A CONSCIENCE.

THAT SEEMS TO BE AN AMAZING DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DR. KING AND STOKELY CARMICHAEL.

>> YEAH, AND LOOK, THE LEADERS THAT EMERGE IN THE BLACK POWER MOVEMENT IN 1966, IN THE SOUTH YOU HAD THIS NEW LEADERSHIP WITHIN SNICK, THEY HAD SPENT THE PREVIOUS FOUR OR FIVE YEARS ORGANIZING VOTERS, BLACK VOTERS TO VOTE IN DEEP, YOU KNOW, ALABAMA, MISSISSIPPI, PLACES WHERE THE KU KLUX KLAN OPERATED WITH IMPUNITY AND EVEN WHERE THE POLICE WERE INCREDIBLY VIOLENT TOWARDS THE BLACK COMMUNITY AND BLACK FOLKS HAD SHOTGUNS TO PROTECT THEMSELVES SO THEIR ATTITUDE IS WE CAN'T GO INTO PLACES LIKE THAT AND EXPECT BLACKS TO PUT DOWN ARMS AND NOT DEFEND THEMSELVES.

MEANWHILE HUGHIE NEWTON THAT FOUNDED THE BLACK PANTHER PARTY IN OAKLAND THAT YEAR WERE DEALING WITH, YOU KNOW, THE VIOLENCE OF THE WHITE POLICE IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD AND WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT WHAT WE'RE STILL LIVING WITH TODAY, THE IDEA THAT BLACK FOLKS, YOU KNOW, DIDN'T HAVE RIGHTS ON HOW TO DEFEND THEMSELVES OR PROTECT THEMSELVES AGAINST POLICE VIOLENCE ALSO WAS SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, WAS NOT AT ALL UNREASONABLE.

>> THAT IS WHAT THE BLACK PANTHER PARTY'S ORIGINAL NAME WAS ABOUT, RIGHT?

>> THE BLACK PANTHER PARTY FOR SELF-DEFENSE AND THEY HAD ACTUALLY TAKEN THAT SYMBOL.

IT'S AN INTERESTING STORY.

THE ORIGINAL BLACK PANTHER PARTY HAD BEEN FOUNDED BY STOKELY CARMICHAEL OR AT LEAST HE HELPED ORGANIZE IT IN RURAL ALABAMA IN A PLACE CALLED LOUNS COUNTY WHERE HE HAD NOT ONLY ORGANIZED BLACKS TO VOTE BUT IT ACTUALLY GOT THEM TO FORM THEIR OWN POLITICAL PARTY AND ADOPTED AS THEIR SYMBOL FOR -- TO BE RECOGNIZED BY PEOPLE AT THE POLLS THAT COULDN'T NECESSARILY READ A BLACK PANTHER AND LATER THAT YEAR, THAT SYMBOL WAS ADOPTED BY HUGHIE NEWTON AND BOBBY SEAL AND THEY HAD A TEN-POINT PROGRAM AND PRACTICAL BUT THEIR MAIN AGENDA AND MAIN PROGRAM WAS THIS IDEA OF CIVILIAN PATROLS THAT WOULD GO AROUND OAKLAND KEEPING AN EYE ON THE POLICE AND BECAUSE CALIFORNIA HAD OPEN CARRY GUN LAWS AT THE TIME THEY WOULD BE ARMED.

NOT NECESSARILY TO CONFRONT THE POLICE BUT JUST TO KEEP AN EYE ON THEM.

>> STOKELY CARMICHAEL USES THE PHRASE BLACK POWER I THINK IN A SPEECH EARLY IN 1966.

MAYBE IN GREENWOOD, MISSISSIPPI.

TELL ME DID HE REALLY POPULARIZE THAT PHRASE AND WHAT DID HE MEAN BY IT?

WHERE DID IT COME FROM?

>> THE REAL CREDIT FOR COMING UP WITH THE SLOGAN AND ENCOURAGING STOKELY TO USE IT GOES TO ANOTHER SNAKE ORGANIZER NAMED WILLY RICKS AND I TELL HIS STORY IN THE BOOK.

IT'S INTERESTING.

THERE WAS SOMETHING ABOUT THAT SLOGAN THAT WAS CAP NIPPED TO THE PRESS.

SO AS SOON AS THE STORY STARTED, YOU KNOW, IT WAS RECORDED THAT STOKELY HAD USED THIS PHRASE, ALL OF A SUDDEN, THE STORIES WERE PICKED UP BY PAPERS AROUND THE COUNTRY.

HE WAS BOOKED A FEW DAYS LATER ON "FACE THE NATION" AND THE WHITE PRESS WAS VERY INTRIGUED BUT IMMEDIATELY ASSUMED THE WORST THAT IT MEANT REJECTION OF NON-VIOLENCE.

STOKELY TALKED ABOUT THE IDEA DON'T JUST REGISTER TO VOTE BUT USE YOUR VOTING POWER TO ELECT BLACK OFFICIALS.

IT WASN'T AT ALL A CRAZY OR RADICAL IDEA.

BUT AS I SHOW, IT'S SEVERAL POINTS DURING THE BOOK WHEN GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN WHAT BLACK POWER WAS TO WHITE AUDIENCES ON SHOWS LIKE "FACE THE NATION" AND ""MEET THE PRESS" IN A PRIME TIMER ERA WAS PROVOCATIVE DID NOT REALLY TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY AND AS A RESULT, I THINK THE SLOGAN WAS BADLY MISUNDERSTOOD BY A LOT OF PEOPLE.

>> THIS NOTION OF PUSHING BLACK POWER, I THINK YOU SAY IN THE BOOK THAT IT WAS THE MOST DRAMATIC SHIFT IN THE LONG STRUGGLE FOR RACIAL JUSTICE IN AMERICA SINCE THE DAWN OF THE MODERN CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT.

WHAT WAS THE SHIFT?

>> IT WAS QUESTIONING THE GOAL OF INTEGRATION, YOU KNOW, WHICH EVERYBODY ASSOCIATES WITH DR. KING AND THE I HAVE A DREAM SPEECH AND ESSENTIALLY, WHAT STOKELY AND THESE, YOU KNOW, THE YOUNGER GENERATION WAS SAYING WAS YOU KNOW WHAT?

WHEN PEOPLE TALK ABOUT INTEGRATION, YOU KNOW, IT'S REALLY MIDDLE CLASS BLACK FOLKS TALKING TO ENLIGHTENED MIDDLE CLOSE WHITES ABOUT WHETHER THEY COULD INTEGRATE BUT THE EVIDENCE THAT THEY HAD SEEN IN PLACES LIKE ALABAMA AND IN PLACES LIKE OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA WHERE THE PANTHERS WERE STARTED WAS THAT WHITE FOLKS HAD NO INTEREST IN INTEGRATING WITH THE BLACKS IN THE SOUT IN THE INNER CITY AND DR. KING TOOK IT TO CHICAGO IN 1966 HE FOUND OUT THE WHITE RESIDENTS OF CHICAGO HAD NO INTEREST IN HAVING BLACKS MOVE INTO THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS.

SO IT WAS REALLY A QUESTION OF HOW DO WE MOVE FORWARD TRYING TO KIND OF PURSUE AN AGENDA OF RACIAL JUSTICE IN THE ABSENCE OF INTEGRATION?

>> SO TELL ME ABOUT THE WHITE BACKLASH THAT HAPPENS IN 1966.

>> I HAD NOT REALIZED WHAT A TURNING POINT 1966 WAS IN AMERICAN POLITICAL HISTORY.

WE THINK OF 1968 AND THE ELECTION OF RICHARD NIXON AND DEMOCRATIC CONVENTION BUT IN 1966 THAT THE REPUBLICAN PARTY STARTS TO REBOUND.

RONALD REAGAN IS ELECTED A GOVERNOR IN CALIFORNIA.

THE REPUBLICANS IN THE MIDTERMS PICKED UP A BUNCH OF SEATS IN THE HOUSE, STATE HOUSES.

AND IT'S LARGELY ON THE STRENGTH OF WHITE BACKLASH AGAINST WHAT WAS HAPPENING IN THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT, YOU KNOW, THERE WERE RACE RIOTS IN 1966 AS THERE HAD BEEN IN 1965 BUT ALSO, YOU KNOW, JUST WITHIN A MATTER OF MONTHS, YOU SEE THIS NEW SLOGAN OF BLACK POWER JUST SCARING BLACK PEOPLE, CHANGING THE POLL NUMBERS ON RACIAL ATTITUDES AND THEN LEADING TO THIS HUGE REBOUND BY THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IN THE MIDTERM ELECTIONS WHICH ALSO IS THE MOMENT WHEN RICHARD NIXON STARTS THINKING MAYBE I CAN HAVE ANOTHER SHOT AT RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT.

>> IN YOUR BOOK, YOU TALK ABOUT THE UNREST IN 1965 AND THEN THE BLACK POWER MOVEMENT AND THAT SLOGAN IN 1966 CAUSING A WHITE BACKLASH.

TO WHAT EXTENT DO YOU SEE ECHOES OF THAT IN THE BACKLASH AGAINST THE BLACK LIVES MATTER AND SOME OF THE UNREST WE'VE SEEN RECENTLY?

>> I SEE VERY STRONG.

IT'S INTERESTING.

I WAS IN THE MIDDLE OF WRITING THE BOOK IN THE SUMMER OF 2020 WHEN YOU HAVE A MOVING AND HISTORIC BLACK LIVES MATTER RESPONSE TO THE MURDER OF GEORGE FLOYD AND YOU HAVE HAD, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE IN THE STREETS BOTH BLACK AND WHITE ACROSS THE COUNTRY AND AROUND THE WORLD AND EVERYBODY WAS TALKING ABOUT THIS MOMENT OF RACIAL RECKONING AND THINGS ARE REALLY DIFFERENT THIS TIME AND I WAS THINKING, YOU KNOW WHAT?

I DON'T KNOW THAT THIS IS GOING TO LAST IF YOU LOOK AT THE LESSONS OF 1966, THIS COULD BE FOLLOWED BY VERY STRONG PUSH BACK VERY QUICKLY.

AND INDEED THAT'S WHAT WE SEEN A COUPLE YEARS LATER.

YOU LOOK WHAT IS HAPPENING WITH OBVIOUSLY A LOT OF VOTER SUPPRESSION, EFFORTS AROUND THE COUNTRY BUT PARTICULARLY RIGHT NOW THIS WHOLE ATTACK ON BLACK STUDIES LED BY GOVERNOR DeSANTIS IN FLORIDA AND THAT'S WHERE THE DISCUSSION IS AND REMINISCING OF 1966.

>> YOUR FATHER WAS A PIONEER OF BLACK STUDIES A PROPOSSESSOR OF PRINCETON IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY?

AND THE NOTION OF AFRICAN AMERICAN STUDIES AND BLACK HISTORY WAS NOT DONE FOR THE PURPOSES YOU SEE PEOPLE ACCUSING IT OF NOW ESPECIALLY GOVERNOR DeSANTIS IN FLORIDA.

EXPLAINED HOW THAT CHANGED.

>> IF YOU LISTEN TO RON DeSANTIS, YOU THINK THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF BLACK STUDIES WAS TO MAKE WHITE YOUNG WHITE PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THE HISTORY OF WHITE SUPREMACY AND FEEL BADLY ABOUT THEIR PRIVILEGE.

THAT WASN'T AT ALL THE ORIGINAL IDEA OF THE ORIGINAL ADVOCATES OF BLACK STUDIES.

WHEN BLACK STUDENTS ON CAMPUSES AROUND THE COUNTRY IN THE -- STARTING IN 1966 AND OVER THE SUBSEQUENT YEARS WERE MARCHING, PROTESTING, DEMANDING BLACK STUDIES, IT WAS REALLY FOR THEIR OWN.

THEY THOUGHT THEY DIDN'T KNOW BLACK HISTORY WELL ENOUGH AND HONESTLY, YOU KNOW, WHEN I LOOK AT IT TODAY, I, YOU KNOW, THE IDEA THAT IN THE SORT OF MULTI CULTURAL WORLD THAT WE LIVE IN TODAY THAT YOU'RE GOING TO TELL YOUNG PEOPLE THAT THEY HAVE TO STUDY JUST ONE VERSION OF HISTORY.

THIS KIND OF, YOU KNOW, OLD FASHIONED WHICH WAS MOSTLY ABOUT THE ACHIEVEMENTS OF POWERFUL WHITE MEN, YOU KNOW, OF COURSE THAT'S NOT THE ONLY, YOU KNOW, KIND OF HISTORY.

SO THERE IS ALSO A CITIZENSHIP COMPONENT THAT THE EARLY PROPONENTS OF BLACK STUDIES SAY WE WANT TO BE AMERICANS.

WE WANT TO STAY HERE.

WE'RE NOT DOING TO TAKE UP ARMS AND TRY TO OVER THROW THE GOVERNMENT.

BUT WE FEEL LIKE, YOU KNOW, JUST TO ACCEPT OUR POSITION AND FUTURE AS AMERICAN CITIZENS WE HAVE A RIGHT TO UNDERSTAND THE ROLE THAT WE HAVE PLAYED IN THE JOURNEY AND HISTORICAL JOURNEY.

>> YOU TALK ABOUT THE BLACK POWER MOVEMENT SHIFTING POLITICS BUT IT ALSO IN 1966 IN YOUR BOOK I NOTICED CHANGES BLACK CULTURE.

THE NOTION OF MUSIC TO LITERATURE, WHATEVER, IS THAT STILL TRUE TODAY?

>> I THINK SO.

WE'RE STILL FIGHTING THE SAME FIGHTS AND PROBLEMS THAT GAVE RISE TO BLACK POWER ARE STILL WITH US AND THAT IS ABSOLUTELY TRUE.

I ACTUALLY THINK THAT IT'S IN SOMEWAYS THE CULTURAL LEGACY IS THE ONE THAT, YOU KNOW, REALLY CHANGED FOR GOOD.

AND IS -- YOU KNOW, REALLY BEEN IRREVERSIBLE BUT ALSO SAYING LOOK, WE CAN HAVE ASPIRATIONS FOR EDUCATION, PROFESSIONALLY, FOR ACHIEVEMENT OF DIFFERENT SORTS BUT WE DON'T HAVE TO HIDE OUR BLACKNESS IN THE PROCESS.

WE DON'T HAVE TO PROCESS OUR HAIR.

WE DON'T HAVE TO DRESS LIKE WHITE PEOPLE.

WE CAN HAVE OUR OWN, YOU KNOW, CULTURE AND THAT DOESN'T JUST EMULATE WHITE CULTURE.

WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT THE TRANSITION FOR EXAMPLE FROM MOTOWN AND R AND B WHERE BLACK FOLKS, IT'S GREAT MUSIC BUT DRESSING AND STRAIGHTENING THEIR HAIR AND TRYING TO SORT OF, YOU KNOW, LOOK WHITE IN SOMEWAYS AND THE TRANSITION TO HIP-HOP.

IT WAS A REALIZATION THAT AMERICA WAS NOT MOVING VERY QUICKLY TOWARDS BEING A TRULY INTEGRATED SOCIETY SO HOW ARE BLACK FOLKS GOING TO THINK OF THEMSELVES AND MOVE AND LIVE AHEAD SIDE BY SIDE WITH WHITES BUT WITHIN THE ABSENCE OF TRUE AND TOTAL INTEGRATION?

I THINK THAT ASPECT OF BLACK POWER IS SOMETHING IT WAS REVOLUTIONARY AND CHANGED FOREVER AND THAT'S IN SOMEWAYS, YOU KNOW, PERHAPS THE MOST POSITIVE OUT COME OF THIS RADICAL SHIFT IN THE YEAR OF 1966.

>> MARK WHITAKER, THANK YOU FOR JOINING US.

>> THANK YOU, WALTER.

ALWAYS A PLEASURE.

>>> AND THAT'S OUR PROGRAM FOR TONIGHT.

IF YOU WANT TO FIND OUT WHAT IS COMING UP ON THE SHOW EACH NIGHT, SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER AT PBS.ORG/AMANPOUR.

THANK YOU FOR WATCHING "AMANPOUR AND COMPANY" AND JOIN US AGAIN TOMORROW NIGHT.