In the latest instalment of the ongoing saga between the Medical Board of Australia, AHPRA, and head of Exit International, Philip Nitschke, the latter seems to have scored a small victory. In July 2014 the South Australian Branch of the Medical Board moved to suspend the medical practice licence of Nitschke:The Board made the decision after considering a submission from Dr Nitschke, as part of the process of taking 'immediate action'. Section 156 of the National Law enables the Board to limit a practitioner's registration in some way to keep the public safe, while other investigations or processes continue. Continue reading

A report in the Melbourne Age newspaper this week says that Labor Premier Daniel Andrews has significant concerns about euthanasia and does not support moves towards legislation on the issue. While conceding that there seems to be 'momentum' on the issue, he expressed reservations, saying that, "there are some safeguard issues, and there some balance issues I'm troubled by."Andrews pointed out that he developed his opposition to euthanasia when he was Victoria's Health Minister in a previous Labor government where he observed, according to the report, 'a growing need to free up hospital beds to meet patient demand. Without enough checks and balances around physician-assisted death, "there are some challenges, particularly in a system where there are finite resources"'. Continue reading

by Paul Russell: Recently, two Australian academics published a paper in the Medical Journal of Australia proposing what might be termed by them and others as a 'middle way' on the question of euthanasia. But the proposal under the heading: A minimalist legislative solution to the problem of euthanasia is a long way away, in legislative and practical terms, from a slight adjustment to the current law.The proposal has a veneer of credibility that does create some appeal. We have two irreconcilable positions; one for change, the other opposed. Why can't we find a 'win-win', middle way where we can all say: we can live with that? After all, isn't politics 'the art of compromise'? Continue reading

Yesterday the Melbourne Age and Sydney Morning Herald newspapers ramped up its editorial support for euthanasia laws by publishing yet another story about a person with a difficult diagnosis who wants the 'option' of killing himself. Predictably they also editorialised on the same issue at a time when every other newspaper is covering such pressing matters as the national budget, dealing with the threat of terrorism, social disadvantage etc. This new story feature's Victoria's own 'doctor death', Dr Rodney Syme, vice president of the Victorian pro-euthanasia lobby, and records in words, images and video Syme handing the person a bottle identified as containing Nembutal. Syme has admitted providing Nembutal to others. In 2014, he admitted, in the same newspaper, that he gave Steve Guest Nembutal in the weeks before Guest killed himself in 2005. Syme was effectively goading the Victorian Police into action; the article reporting his thoughts as follows:"Dr Syme, 78, said after watching state Parliaments reject 16 euthanasia bills over the past 20 years he was ready to "out" himself and be charged over Mr Guest's death because a court case could set a useful legal precedent for doctors who are too scared to help terminally ill people end their own lives." Continue reading

By Paul Russell: The Upper House of the Victorian Parliament debated a government motion introduced today in respect of end-of-life issues. This follows a lapsing of a debate yesterday by Colleen Hartland MLC to refer the matter of euthanasia to the Victorian Law Reform Committee and another pending motion by Fiona Patten MLC along similar lines.The government motion, by contrast, is for a broad look at all end-of-life issues and does not even mention euthanasia. It passed today by a significant majority. Continue reading

The Upper House of the Victorian Parliament debated a euthanasia motion today that was ultimately left unresolved. The Motion clearly did not have enough support. As we reported earlier, the motion by Greens MLC, Colleen Hartland was designed to ask the State Attorney-General to refer the matter to the Victorian Law Reform Commission for an inquiry. The VLRC, as we noted, is not a body answerable to the Victorian people, is charged with reform of the law when no mandate for such reform has been made and has only a legal framework that cannot adequately accont for the ethical and moral dimensions of any euthanasia law.Speaking against the motion, Bernie Finn MLC, observed to his colleagues that to support this motion would be to effectively abrogate their responsibilities as legislators elected by the Victorian people to fulfil that function. Finn, instead, argued for a parliamentary inquiry where the issues could be thrashed out by members of parliament. A position that we also support (see earlier article). Continue reading

A question of conscience Victorian Parliament's Upper House set to debate euthanasia motion next weekBy Paul Russell: Continue reading

I reported recently about the suicide death of an elderly Victorian woman suffering chronic arthritis. Used as a media spike for euthanasia, it was anything but an example to be considered. The family of Mrs Hookey are under investigation in respect to her death. They were in the home that night.They maintain that they had nothing to do with her death and I, for one, have no problems accepting that assertion.The family are upset that they are 'being treated like criminals'. An understandable sentiment. No one like the idea of being thought of as having committed a crime. But being a 'suspect' is not the same as being proven as a criminal and our laws treat people as innocent until (unless) proven otherwise. Continue reading

Reports in The Melbourne Age on the suicide death of an elderly woman, is being used by euthanasia advocates to push their agenda.The Age reports: "So when years of intolerable arthritic pain finally took its toll last year, putting her at imminent risk of being hospitalised until the end, Mrs Hookey secretly implemented her final exit strategy."Mrs Hookey was not dying. Certainly she was in pain and discomfort. Why this was not being effectively managed is not mentioned. But she would not have been a candidate for euthanasia under any of the bills presented in Australia in recent years.She may have had access to euthanasia if she had lived in The Netherlands where, recently, a euthanasia service was criticised for having agreed to euthanasia for an elderly woman who had tinnitis and simply feared finding herself in a nursing home.Mrs Hookey was a long-time member of Exit International. The inference is that she obtained a lethal drug - probably Nembutal - via contact with Exit. According to The Age, Exit director, Philip Nitschke, is again warning his supporters not to discuss such matters with Police.The thrust of the initial story was that Mrs Hookey were upset at the treatment by Victorian Police: "Ever since, Mr Hookey and his family have been subjected to an increasingly alarming police investigation, and they now fear they may be caught up in the controversy surrounding Philip Nitschke - the founder of Exit International who is being investigated by police and health authorities for helping several people take their lives."What are the Police to do? Firstly, Mr Hookey and two others were in the Hookey house the night that Mrs Hookey suicided. Even if only for the sake of eliminating any suspicion of their involvement, the Police must investigate the circumstances. Secondly, the article explains that, "They (Police) took the family's computer and Ipad, and tried to find any books that Mrs Hookey might have used to plan her death. This suggests that they are likely more concerned about the influence of Exit International in Mrs Hookey's death.While ever assisting in suicide is a crime, such investigations are entirely appropriate. Certainly, they will be difficult for the family who, I think, need to appreciate the ultimate likely benefit from an outcome that exonerates them.In response to questions about the Police action, Victorian Premier, Daniel Andrews observed that, "These are very deeply personal and sensitive matters. The law is the law though and people have a job to do. But I would urge everybody involved to be as sensitive and respectful as they possibly can," he said.Mrs Hookey's husband, though I'm sure genuine, has echoed the mantra of Exit and Exit supporters that, if euthanasia were legal, Mrs Hookey would not have had to 'die alone'. This misses the point. She would not have qualified.Mrs Hookey's death was a suicide. She even left a suicide note by her bed. Sad as this is, it is not an argument for euthanasia. What it should speak to us about is the problem with elder suicide. Philip Nitschke confirmed this in an email to The Age:"Suicide is NOT a crime, and people like Dorothy need no assistance to take this lawful step," he wrote in an email. Continue reading

The Tasmanian MPs who tabled and pushed the last Euthanasia bill defeated in 2013, have said that they will try again later this year. The then Premier, Lara Giddings MP and her then deputy, Nick McKim MP, now on the opposition benches made the announcement in The Examiner Newspaper on the 14th of March.But bringing the issue to a vote in this new bill will not be as easy as it was when the then Premier and her Deputy were in control of the parliamentary debate from the treasury benches. Continue reading