The right to choose an assisted death : time for legislation?

The legal framework that operates at the end of life in Australia needs to be reformed. • Voluntary euthanasia and assisted suicide are currently unlawful. • Both activities nevertheless occur not infrequently in Australia, in part because palliative care cannot relieve physical and psychological pain and suffering in all cases. • In this respect, the law is deficient. The law is also unfair because it doesn’t treat people equally. Some people can be helped to die on their own terms as a result of their knowledge and/or connections while some are able to hasten their death by the refusal of life-sustaining treatment. But others do not have access to the means for their life to end. • A very substantial majority of Australians have repeatedly expressed in public opinion polls their desire for law reform on these matters. Many are concerned at what they see is happening to their loved ones as they reach the end of their lives, and want the confidence that when their time comes they will be able to exercise choice in relation to assisted dying. • The most consistent reason advanced not to change the law is the need to protect the vulnerable. There is a concern that if the law allows voluntary euthanasia and assisted suicide for some people, it will be expanded and abused, including pressures being placed on highly dependent people and those with disabilities to agree to euthanasia. • But there is now a large body of experience in a number of international jurisdictions following the legalisation of voluntary euthanasia and/or assisted suicide. This shows that appropriate safeguards can be implemented to protect vulnerable people and prevent the abuse that opponents of assisted dying have feared. It reveals that assisted dying meets a real need among a small minority of people at the end of their lives. It also provides reassurance to people with terminal and incurable disease that they will not be left to suffer the indignities and discomfort of a nasty death. • Australia is an increasingly secular society. Strong opposition to assisted death by religious groups that is based on their belief in divine sanctity of all human life is not a justification for denying choice for those who do not share that belief. • It is now time for Australian legislators to respond to this concern and this experience by legislating to enhance the quality of death for those Australians who seek assisted dying.

(Failed) voluntary euthanasia law reform in Australia: Two decades of trends, models and politics

Within Australia, there have been many attempts to pass voluntary euthanasia (VE) or physician-assisted suicide (PAS) legislation. From 16 June 1993 until the date of writing, 51 Bills have been introduced into Australian parliaments dealing with legalising VE or PAS. Despite these numerous attempts, the only successful Bill was the Rights of the Terminally Ill Act 1995 (NT), which was enacted in the Northern Territory, but a short time later overturned by the controversial Euthanasia Laws Act 1997 (Cth). Yet, in stark contrast to the significant political opposition, for decades Australian public opinion has overwhelmingly supported law reform legalising VE or PAS. While there is ongoing debate in Australia, both through public discourse and scholarly publications, about the merits and dangers of reform in this field, there has been remarkably little analysis of the numerous legislative attempts to reform the law, and the context in which those reform attempts occurred. The aim of this article is to better understand the reform landscape in Australia over the past two decades. The information provided in this article will better equip Australians, both politicians and the general public, to have a more nuanced understanding of the political context in which the euthanasia debate has been and is occurring. It will also facilitate a more informed debate in the future.

How should Australia regulate voluntary euthanasia and assisted suicide?

The purpose of this paper is to provide a basis from which to start an informed and rational dialogue in Australia about voluntary euthanasia (VE) and assisted suicide (AS). It does this by seeking to chart the broad landscape of issues that can be raised as relevant to how this conduct should be regulated by the law. It is not our purpose to persuade. Rather, we have attempted to address the issues as neutrally as possible and to canvass both sides of the argument in an even-handed manner. We hope that this exercise places the reader in a position to consider the question posed by this paper: How should Australia regulate voluntary euthanasia and assisted suicide? In line with the approach taken in the paper, this question does not take sides in the debate. It simply asks how VE and AS should be regulated, acknowledging that both prohibition and legalisation of such conduct involve regulation. We begin by considering the wider legal framework that governs end of life decision-making. Decisions to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining treatment that result in a person’s death can be lawful. This could be because, for example, a competent adult refuses such treatment. Alternatively, stopping or not providing treatment can be lawful when it is no longer in a person’s best interests to receive it. The law also recognises that appropriate palliative care should not attract criminal responsibility. By contrast, VE and AS are unlawful in Australia and could lead to prosecution for crimes such as murder, manslaughter or aiding and abetting suicide. But this is not to say that such conduct does not occur in practice. Indeed, there is a body of evidence that VE and AS occur in Australia, despite them being unlawful. There have been repeated efforts to change the law in this country, mainly by the minor political parties. However, apart from a brief period when VE and AS was lawful in the Northern Territory, these attempts to reform the law have been unsuccessful. The position is different in a small but increasing number of jurisdictions overseas where such conduct is lawful. The most well known is the Netherlands but there are also statutory regimes that regulate VE and/or AS in Belgium and Luxembourg in Europe, and Oregon and Washington in the United States. A feature of these legislative models is that they incorporate review or oversight processes that enable the collection of data about how the law is being used. As a result, there is a significant body of evidence that is available for consideration to assess the operation of the law in these jurisdictions and some of this is considered briefly here. Assisting a suicide, if done for selfless motives, is also legal in Switzerland, and this has resulted in what has been referred to as ‘euthanasia tourism’. This model is also considered. The paper also identifies the major arguments in favour of, and against, legalisation of VE and AS. Arguments often advanced in favour of law reform include respect for autonomy, that public opinion favours reform, and that the current law is incoherent and discriminatory. Key arguments against legalising VE and AS point to the sanctity of life, concerns about the adequacy and effectiveness of safeguards, and a ‘slippery slope’ that will allow euthanasia to occur for minors or for adults where it is not voluntary. We have also attempted to step beyond these well trodden and often rehearsed cases ‘for and against’. To this end, we have identified some ethical values that might span both sides of the debate and perhaps be the subject of wider consensus. We then outline a framework for considering the issue of how Australia should regulate VE and AS. We begin by asking whether such conduct should be criminal acts (as they presently are). If VE and AS should continue to attract criminal responsibility, the next step is to enquire whether the law should punish such conduct more or less than is presently the case, or whether the law should stay the same. If a change is favoured as to how the criminal law punishes VE and AS, options considered include sentencing reform, creating context-specific offences or developing prosecutorial guidelines for how the criminal justice system deals with these issues. If VE and AS should not be criminal acts, then questions arise as to how and when they should be permitted and regulated. Possible elements of any reform model include: ensuring decision-making is competent and voluntary; ascertaining a person’s eligibility to utilise the regime, for example, whether it depends on him or her having a terminal illness or experiencing pain and suffering; and setting out processes for how any decision must be made and evidenced. Options to bring about decriminalisation include challenging the validity of laws that make VE and AS unlawful, recognising a defence to criminal prosecution, or creating a statutory framework to regulate the practice. We conclude the paper where we started: with a call for rational and informed consideration of a difficult and sensitive issue. How should Australia regulate voluntary euthanasia and assisted suicide?

Property rights in and entitlement to possession of sperm following death

In May 2011, the Supreme Court of New South Wales in Jocelyn Edwards; re the estate of the late Mark Edwards [2011] NSWSC 478 granted an application by a wife, in her capacity as administrator of her late husband's estate, to possession of sperm extracted from the body of her late husband.

Gesturing elsewhere: the identity politics of the Balinese death/thrash metal scene

This essay explores the political significance of Balinese death/thrash fandom. In the early 1990s, the emergence of a death/thrash scene in Bali paralleled growing criticism of accelerated tourism development on the island. Specifically, locals protested the increasing ubiquity of Jakarta, 'the centre', cast as threatening to an authentically 'low', peripheral Balinese culture. Similarly, death/thrash enthusiasts also gravitated toward certain fringes, although they rejected dominant notions of Balinese-ness by gesturing elsewhere, toward a global scene. The essay explores the ways in which death/thrash enthusiasts engaged with local discourses by coveting their marginality, and aims to demonstrate how their articulations of 'alien-ness' contributed in important ways to a broader regionalism.

Factors associated with the wish to hasten death : a study of patients with terminal illness

Background. There is considerable debate regarding the clinical issues surrounding the wish to hasten death (WTHD) in the terminally ill. The clinical factors contributing to the WTHD need further investigation among the terminally ill in order to enhance understanding of the clinical assessment and treatment needs that underlie this problem. A more detailed understanding may assist with the development of appropriate therapeutic interventions. Method. A sample of terminally ill cancer patients (N=256) recruited from an in-patient hospice unit, home palliative care service and a general hospital palliative care consulting service from Brisbane Australia between 1998–2001 completed a questionnaire assessing psychological (depression and anxiety), social (family relationship, social support, level of burden on others) and the impact of physical symptoms. The association between these factors and the WTHD was investigated. Results. A high WTHD was reported by 14% of patients. A discriminant function analysis revealed that the following variables were associated with a high WTHD (P<0·001): higher levels of depressive symptoms, being admitted to an in-patient hospice setting, a greater perception of being a burden on others, lower family cohesion, lower levels of social support, higher levels of anxiety and greater impact of physical symptoms. Conclusions. Psychological and social factors are related to a WTHD among terminally ill cancer patients. Greater attention needs to be paid to the assessment of psychological and social issues in order to provide appropriate therapeutic interventions for terminally ill patients.

Doctors and their patients : A context for understanding the wish to hasten death

There is a paucity of research that has directly examined the role of the health professional in dealing with a terminally ill patient's wish to hasten death (WTHD) and the implications of this for the support and services needed in the care for a dying patient. Themes to emerge from a qualitative analysis of interviews conducted on doctors (n=24) involved in the treatment and care of terminally ill patients were (i) the doctors' experiences in caring for their patients (including themes of emotional demands/expectations, the duration of illness, and the availability of palliative care services); (ii) the doctors' perception of the care provided to their respective patients (comprising themes concerning satisfaction with the care for physical symptoms, for emotional symptoms, or overall care); (iii) the doctors' attitudes to euthanasia and (iv) the doctors' perception of their patients' views/beliefs regarding euthanasia and hastened death. When responses were categorised according to the patients' level of a WTHD, the theme concerning the prolonged nature of the patients' illnesses was prominent in the doctor group who had patients with the highest WTHD, whereas there was only a minority of responses concerning support from palliative care services and satisfaction with the level of emotional care in this group. This exploratory study presents a set of descriptive findings identifying themes among a small group of doctors who have been involved in the care of terminally ill cancer patients, to investigate factors that may be associated with the WTHD among these patients. The pattern of findings suggest that research investigating the doctor-patient interaction in this setting may add to our understanding of the problems (for patients and their doctors) that underpins the wish to hasten death in the terminally ill.

Terminally ill cancer patients’ wish to hasten death

This exploratory study investigated factors associated with the wish to hasten death among a sample of terminally ill cancer patients. Semi-structured interviews conducted on a total of 72 hospice and home palliative care patients were subjected to qualitative analysis using QSRNUDIST. The main themes to emerge suggested that patients with a high wish to hasten death had greater concerns with physical symptoms and psychologica l suffering, perceived themselves to be more of a burden to others, and experienced higher levels of demoralization, while also reporting less confidence in symptom control, fewer social supports, less satisfaction with life experiences and fewer religious beliefs when compared with patients who had a moderate or no wish to hasten death. The implications of these findings will be discussed.