Click here to read
Independent MP Kate Chaney is renewing her campaign to change federal laws that prevent voluntary assisted dying consultations from taking place by telephone or video call.
Chaney first introduced legislation almost three years ago to amend Commonwealth criminal laws banning telecommunications services from being used to incite suicide. Her bill sought to clarify that lawful voluntary assisted dying, or VAD, should not be treated as suicide under those provisions. The proposal lapsed without being passed, but the issue has returned to the political agenda following Labor’s national conference.
At the conference, which ended on 25 July, Labor voted to support repealing the restrictions and allowing its MPs a conscience vote. However, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese subsequently said the government might not introduce legislation, arguing that telehealth could undermine medical safeguards despite his support for VAD.
Chaney argues the current law causes unnecessary suffering, particularly for terminally ill people in rural and regional areas who may be unable to travel. Doctors and pharmacists can be required to drive for hours to meet patients in person, while some patients deteriorate so quickly that they lose decision-making capacity or become unable to take the medication before completing the process.
“For years, VAD practitioners have been saying this telehealth issue is the most important issue to be dealt with,” Chaney said.
The restriction comes from legislation introduced in 2005 to address online material encouraging suicide, more than a decade before VAD became legal in Australia. Every state and territory now permits VAD except the Northern Territory, where proposed legislation is expected to pass in August. Australia is reportedly the only country that specifically prevents VAD consultations through telehealth.
Chaney said repealing the federal restriction would not remove existing safeguards. Patients generally must make three separate requests and be assessed by two doctors, while two independent witnesses are also required.
“Of course the preference would be that it’s in person. But at the moment, you can’t even ring your doctor and ask some questions after you’ve got the medication, even after you’ve made your three requests for VAD in person,” she said.
“If the doctor speaks to you about it on the phone at all, then they are open to criminal prosecution. So you end up with doctors having to speak in cryptic terms when they should be able to speak clearly, which is what patients deserve.”
Some states already allow telehealth within their VAD systems, but federal law overrides those provisions. It can also prevent prescriptions from being sent electronically, requiring medication scripts to be posted, couriered or delivered by hand.
The Australian Medical Association supports telehealth as a complement to face-to-face care, while the Law Council of Australia has called for urgent reform. Opponents, including some religious leaders, argue the existing restrictions should remain because of concerns about coercion and safety. Chaney and other advocates say protections against abuse, clinical guidelines and requirements to discuss palliative care would continue to apply.
Chaney’s bill is now before Parliament and is scheduled for debate on 11 August. “That’s the opportunity for the prime minister to make good on the conscience vote that he promised,” she said.