A bid to protect the religious freedom of faith-based aged care facilities in New South Wales was rejected in the Upper House on 19 November by 23 votes to 16. But the issue could be raised in an upcoming statutory review of voluntary assisted dying laws.
Liberal MLC Susan Carter’s private member’s bill would have given residential facilities the same right that hospitals have to decline euthanasia and assisted suicide on their premises, while requiring them to provide alternative arrangements for residents.
Under the existing law, residents of aged care facilities may access all stages of the VAD process on-site.
This goes further than similar laws in Victoria, Western Australia, and Tasmania which all allow protections for faith-based aged care facilities.
Go Gentle Australia and Dying with Dignity NSW contended that the bill was an attack on the rights of people at the end of life.
But others, including Archbishop Anthony Fisher OP, urged supporters to get behind the bill and ask their Upper House representatives to protect freedom of religion and the right of people of the same faith to live together in a way that respects their values and beliefs.
Legal euthanasia and assisted suicide have been operating in NSW for close to two years, with a statutory review due to begin after 28 November.
Minister for Mental Health Rose Jackson, speaking on behalf of herself and Minister for Health Ryan Park, told parliament they would oppose the bill and that the “appropriate forum” to explore the issues it raised was via the statutory review.
“Legislative change has not been ruled out as an outcome of this review process,” she said.
Carter told The Catholic Weekly she was disappointed people who voted against the bill didn’t seem to appreciate the impact VAD provision in an aged care home has on the other residents.
“It’s their home as well and having VAD administered there starts to change the culture of a faith-based facility,” she said.
“Given the assurances during this debate, we look forward to seeing this issue being included in the statutory review.”
The first annual report showed that 398 people died in the first seven months of the state’s VAD regime.
In Victoria, the government’s proposed reforms to aggressively expand its VAD laws were significantly limited thanks to two amendments passed on 14 November.
One, moved by Labor MP Michael Galea, removed the ability of registered health practitioners, including dentists, podiatrists, and Chinese medicine practitioners, to initiate conversations about VAD.
The other, moved by Labor MP Ryan Batchelor, on the rights of conscientious objectors, was similar to an earlier proposal from Liberal MP Erin Mulholland. It narrows the scope of the minimum information that must be provided by a medical practitioner.
“These two amendments, I think, signal the government will always go as far as what they think they can get away with politically, and they have acknowledged under pressure that they may have overstepped in what appears to be an embarrassing backdown,” Mulholland told parliament during the debate.
“I am pleased that sensible heads on both sides of this debate have prevailed in, I think, gutting some of the worst aspects of this bill.”