ACTION ALERT | STOP THE USE OF TELEHEALTH FOR ASSISTED SUICIDE (AS) and EUTHANASIA

As you are aware all states and the Australian Capital Territory have legalised assisted suicide (AS) and euthanasia. A bill to legalise is expected to be tabled in the Northern Territory later in 2026 year.

• Under Australian federal law (Criminal Code Act 1995) contact between doctor and patients (in relation to AS and euthanasia) must be in person. 
• In 2023/2024 RTLA with you, our committed supporters campaigned successfully against code changes to remove this vital safeguard.
• Once more we must oppose a move by proponents of AS and euthanasia to remove this VITAL safeguard.

Please write to both:

Hon Anthony Albanese MP  and
Prime Minister of Australia
Parliament House
Canberra ACT 2600

Hon Michelle Rowland MP
Federal Attorney-General
Parliament House
Canberra ACT 2600

Or email: www.pm.gov.au/contact#no-back   or email:   Michelle.Rowland.MP@aph.gov.au

SUGGESTED POINTS:

• Safety first:  VAD delivered by telehealth may be ‘’convenient’’ but is UNSAFE.  Almost all VAD assessors are unknown to the patient. To think doctors are able to make proper VAD assessments for patients they have never met before for this IRREVERSIBLE undertaking - and are able to exclude depression and coercion and establish motivation - is fanciful.
• Lack of safeguards/ exploitation: Increased risk of inability to detect coercion in a brief video-link - "abusers" may well be present at the session.
• Difficulty Assessing Mental Capacity: An in-person assessment is vital determine if a patient has mental capacity to make the decision and not suffering from treatable depression, -difficult to gauge via a screen and without the ability to judge body language.
• "No Substitute" for Face-to-Face Care: There is no replacement for in-person consultation, allowing for better rapport, physical examination, and holistic assessment. Patients may have other physical issues requiring a hands-on approach which cannot be provided via an e-consultation.
• Physical constraints increasing risk: Old or frail patients may be unable to hear properly. In a face-to-face appointment an assessor is able to lean over and adapt their voice to assist the patient - not possible on telehealth. Patients who are  weak may not even be able to move a camera screen!
• Expansion in the future:  Expanding the availability of ‘’VAD’’ and euthanasia by telehealth would allow states to use telehealth for any future expansion e.g. including for mental illness or for children. 
• Technology impairment – conversation break-up in remote areas, static on the line, other diversions including visual or hearing impairment can affect discussions and increase vulnerability to make quick decisions.
• Doctor Shopping - Availability of telehealth makes doctor shopping easier, increases risk that factors impairing judgement (e.g. depression) are not detected. 

We are able to help compose your letter – please feel free to phone or email the Right to Life Australia office