Both assisted suicide and euthanasia are now legal in all Australia’s states and the ACT with a bill to follow suit expected to be introduced into the Northern Territory this year. The federal government has not yet made legislative amendments to exempt doctors from the ban on telehealth consultations for assisted suicide and euthanasia.
In November 2023, Justice Wendy Abraham of the Federal Court of Australia ruled assisted suicide and euthanasia – euphemistically ‘’Voluntary Assisted Dying’’ – fits the definition of "suicide" under the Commonwealth Criminal Code. Justice Abraham ruled the word "suicide" in the federal code covers the intentional ending of a person's life.
Because of this ruling it remains illegal under Commonwealth law to use a "carriage service" (phone, video, email or internet) to counsel or discuss assisted suicide or euthanasia (metaphorically called “VAD”) as this violates prohibitions against inciting suicide. Doctors face criminal prosecution for discussing assisted suicide and euthanasia (“VAD”) over telehealth platforms like phones or email.
There have been many attempts to overturn this restriction including the tabling of private members’ bills. In March 2025, the Australian Medical Association media release called on the government to amend the Criminal Code.
It is essential those concerned with the protection of the lives of patients oppose all moves by the federal government to legislate to permit doctors to use telehealth consultations for voluntary assisted dying and euthanasia.
The offence of using a Carriage Service for suicide related material
It is an offence to use a carriage service for suicide-related material, as contained in section 474.29A of the Criminal Code 1995 (Cth) and is punishable by a maximum fine of 1,000 penalty units.
Arguments against Telehealth Consultations for euthanasia and assisted dying:
- As a matter of principle, the policy of our federal government is in opposition to suicide. The Australian government has had a National Suicide Prevention Strategy NSPS including plans, programmes and research to help prevent suicide and reduce its impact.
- For our federal parliament to vote to abrogate the present ban on the use of Carriage Services to facilitate or counsel for suicide would be in direct opposition to the NSPS.
- Telehealth consultations touching on voluntary assisted dying and euthanasia would be the most serious and decisive step in the lives of patients. Any consultations between patients and their physicians which involve patients requesting access to voluntary assisted dying must, of necessity, be treated with seriousness because it involves “life and death”
- For our society to allow “life and death” consultations to take place by telephone or by video diminishes the principle of the inherent dignity and value of human life. As a society we must not countenance such a devaluation of life.
- The prospect of telehealth consultations allowing access to assisted suicide is a dramatic step down a perilous path if physicians were authorised to prescribe death-on-demand without seeing patients in person.
- Even face to face consultations between patients and physicians are often unsatisfactory for the care and welfare of the patient, due to patients’ problems with open communication.
- In the case of consultations for ‘’VAD’’ patients may find it more difficult to verbalise their underlying thoughts. Patients are often experiencing undiagnosed depression. There may be a complex interplay of factors relating to their physical and mental health. These factors may affect their judgement and capacity to deal with issues and decisions facing them. Such factors are also impacted by mental illness.
- Such situations require great skills on the part of physicians. However, , they are unlikely to be able to draw on those skills within the context of a telehealth consultation.The unnatural situation caused by a remote consultation, even via video, cannot resolve such grave issues for the benefit of patients.
VAD has been legalised in all six states and is already practised in three states. There is a profound possibility that Australians will grow accustomed to the deliberate ending of the lives of patients and come to accept VAD as routine medical practice.
Given this new atmosphere, the introduction of Telehealth Carriage Service consultations for assisted suicide would likely be viewed by Australians as just an inevitable next step.
We need to alert legislators to this likelihood - that medical practitioners are authorised to approve assisted suicide for patients and prescribe fatal dosages of medications for patients to commit doctor assisted suicide – all without the medical practitioner ever seeing the patient in person.
Serious questions arise regards physicians who engage in telehealth consultations. Statistics available from Annual Reports on the operation of voluntary assisted dying in Victoria show that a limited number of medical practitioners are responsible for the majority of voluntary assisted deaths .
Victorian statistics reflect British Columbia, where a limited number of physicians perform the vast number of MAiD deaths. Dr Ellen Wiebe, one of Canada's most outspoken euthanasia doctors, operates a euthanasia clinic in Vancouver disclosed that she has killed 400 people by MAiD (Medical Assistance in Dying).[1]
In Victoria, certain medical practitioners are known ‘facilitators’ of VAD. Their reputations have spread by word of mouth and by referrals from other medical practitioners.
Were legislation passed permitting telehealth consultations for VAD, an undesirable consequence would be the further concentration and increase of VAD procedures
[1] https://thelifeinstitute.net/news/2023/canadian-doctor-boasts-of-euthanising-patients-as-concerns-rise-over-canadas-maid-law
The Right to Life Australia Inc. defends the right to life of all human beings from conception until natural death. We lobby government for legal protection of the most vulnerable in society – the unborn baby, elderly, sick and those with disabilities.