What a dreadful state of affairs in Australia regarding voluntary assisted dying laws

[Bretrick]

Voluntary assisted dying (VAD) has been legal in Victoria since 2019, meaning people like Miki's mum who are suffering from a degenerative condition can choose to take certain medication to end their life.
But healthcare providers can refuse to facilitate VAD if they object to it on ethical grounds.
This is the situation Miki and her mother found themselves in.

"I was really shocked to learn that a publicly funded hospital could have policies that existed on ideological or religious grounds," Miki says.

"Someone like my mum, who can't talk, can't move, can't advocate for themselves… is facing just about as many barriers as a person can face. So every little hurdle that's added to that is just an enormous stress to overcome."

A mother's message and the hospital that didn't want to hear it

 

[MarkinPhx]

Thanks for sharing. That is one of the best personal stories I have read about this issue. Assisted Death is not legal where I live but if it ever does become legal I do hope that it is written in such a way that does not allow loopholes and that it requires medical facilities to state their policies on the matter.

 

[Mike]

That is a sad situation, Bretrick, but.

I have always been against assisted suicide, not for
any religious reasons, but I see it as the thin edge
of the wedge, our Labour Party is saying that Old
Age Pensioners, are having it too easy and being
given too much money, with no, or very little tax,
to pay, if they can't change the law, to cut back the
pension, or increase the tax, the next best thing is
assisted suicide, without telling the person that they
are assisting his/her departure.

I know that that is Ultra Cynical, but that is how my
mind is working these days.

I also know that in some cases, it is a blessing, but
who will be policing such a facility?

Our Doctors probably won't care, they are striking
for more money etc., etc., etc.

Mike.

 

[Bretrick]

That is a sad situation, Bretrick, but.

I have always been against assisted suicide, not for
any religious reasons, but I see it as the thin edge
of the wedge, our Labour Party is saying that Old
Age Pensioners, are having it too easy and being
given too much money, with no, or very little tax,
to pay, if they can't change the law, to cut back the
pension, or increase the tax, the next best thing is
assisted suicide, without telling the person that they
are assisting his/her departure.

I know that that is Ultra Cynical, but that is how my
mind is working these days.

I also know that in some cases, it is a blessing, but
who will be policing such a facility?

Our Doctors probably won't care, they are striking
for more money etc., etc., etc.

Mike.

If I was to become unable to communicate my wishes, toilet myself, feed myself because of infirmity I would want my life to finish painlessly.
I have been saying this for many years yet still have not taken steps regarding "Do Not Resuscitate" instructions.
I can see your point, and this is a very complex problem.
In the meantime, palliative care is not enough to alleviate their pain and a percentage of people linger in pain, waiting to die.
I do believe that many people are helped along the way to death by doctors, with the patient not knowing. I believe this is happening more than we can imagine.

 

[Tish]

What a total and utter mess.

 

[January]

There is another thread on VAD running also.

Anyway since this article, VAD has become legal in SA too, so the patient would not have to travel to Victoria or any other state now. Is legal in all states now.

I am in favour of VAD - but I am also i n favour of individual doctors being able to refuse.

Not a public hospital having a policy against it but individual doctors making their own decision
and private hospitals should have their policy clearly stated for everyone to see in advance, before they go there.

In SA law doctors can refuse to do so themselves - but they must not refuse the patients request to access somebody else - which I think is fair on both parties.

I do not think a doctor can refuse, as the doctor in article did, to suggest how long a patient is likely to live because of their unwillingness to do VAD - since doctors have to d o that already re patients getting early access to superannuation, life insurance , Centrelink etc
I dont think you can argue you have a conscientious objection against doing that.

 

[gruntlabor]

I do believe that many people are helped along the way to death by doctors, with the patient not knowing. I believe this is happening more than we can imagine.

This happened to two of my family members killed during covid. Also, I was placed on 'Do Not Resusitate' without my knowledge. I never would have known had not a nurse in another hospital been reading my chart aloud. Many elites would like us to die sooner rather than later and are taking violent steps to make it happen.

 

[gruntlabor]

In SA law doctors can refuse to do so themselves - but they must not refuse the patients request to access somebody else - which I think is fair

I don't believe anyone should be forced to recommend a doctor willing to kill.

 

[January]

well, that is the thing about medical care - you can object to doing whatever it is yourself but cannot legally refuse to facilitate the patient accessing someone else.
You are there to provide medical care or access to medical care - not to impose your beliefs on others.

Same principle for any medical procedure

If you cannot do that then you are in wrong job.

 

[gruntlabor]

You are there to provide medical care or access to medical care - not to impose your beliefs on others.

Killing is not medical care.
No-one is talking about 'imposing beliefs', simply 'I don't make recommendations of that sort. Ask at the front desk.'

 

[Paco Dennis]

So many of these cases end up in court. The problem is that most families are not fully aware of ALL the hospitals policies. They are also at a disadvantage, usually, when it comes to $$$$$$. Profit over well-being. The motto of our modern world. Sometimes the patient lucks out, and can settle the matter behind closed doors.

 

[Paco Dennis]

Killing is not medical care.
No-one is talking about 'imposing beliefs', simply 'I don't make recommendations of that sort. Ask at the front desk.'

I wonder if that goes against his Hippocratic oath?

 

[gruntlabor]

I wonder if that goes against his Hippocratic oath?

I think the modern Hippocratic Oath has gone the way of politics, but the original
'... I will follow that system of regimen which, according to my ability and judgment, I consider for the benefit of my patients, and abstain from whatever is deleterious and mischievous. I will give no deadly medicine to any one if asked, nor suggest any such counsel; and in like manner I will not give to a woman a pessary to produce abortion. With purity and with holiness I will pass my life and practice my Art ...' --from Hippocrates' Oath
'First do no harm.' -- Thomas Sydenham, 17th century English physician

 

[January]

Killing is not medical care.
No-one is talking about 'imposing beliefs', simply 'I don't make recommendations of that sort. Ask at the front desk.'

Of course it is imposing a belief - and in law here one cannot refuse to facilitate medical care by somebody else, one can only refuse to do it oneself.
So if your belief is against VAD you can refuse to do it - but not to facilitate the patient accessing it by somebody else. You dont recomend somebody - you let the patient know how to access it.
Exactly the same as any other belief.

and of course it comes under medical care.

I would think 'do no harm' would extend to the harm of keeping the patient alive against their will - but regardless of what you or I think, that is the legal position here.
and this thread was specific about the situation here in Australia

 

[Paco Dennis]

I think the modern Hippocratic Oath has gone the way of politics, but the original
'... I will follow that system of regimen which, according to my ability and judgment, I consider for the benefit of my patients, and abstain from whatever is deleterious and mischievous. I will give no deadly medicine to any one if asked, nor suggest any such counsel; and in like manner I will not give to a woman a pessary to produce abortion. With purity and with holiness I will pass my life and practice my Art ...' --from Hippocrates' Oath
'First do no harm.' -- Thomas Sydenham, 17th century English physician

In the context of our discussion, the Oath's prohibition on giving "deadly medicine" or providing abortion-inducing treatments is relative to physician-assisted suicide and other controversial medical practices. It shows how medical ethics have been grappled with for centuries and continue to evolve as society advances.

While the Hippocratic Oath remains extremely influential in modern medicine, it's important to remember it was written in a very different time and context. Modern medical ethics must adapt to contemporary issues. I guess it is similar to the constitution. There are the "originalists" and the "textualists". Probably the pendulum of justice will swing.

 

[gruntlabor]

I would think 'do no harm' would extend to the harm of keeping the patient alive against their will -

Good grief, what convoluted desperate crazy logic. That's what doctors are for --if you want something else, call an exterminator.

 

[January]

well not the case here in Australia - which is what thread is about.

I dont want to hijack thread by arguing definitions or what your personal beliefs are - all been said in other thread already.

This one was about specifics of access in Australia.

 

[gruntlabor]

Modern medical ethics must adapt to contemporary issues.

With respect, not necessarily.

 

[Paco Dennis]

Before the doctor is hired he should be aware of the hospitals policies. There will be unusual situations that can become complicated, as this one. Deep feelings are stirred and heartache are involved. The whole thing is too complicated. What should be the wishes of the family, is now questioned by the establishment. This is a surprise that is happening all to often these days. The customer can't be aware of all the fine print, so complicated messes will arise. Now, or soon, we will be having AI sorting all this out so everyone will be happy. Right!

 

[January]

Bretrick, this case does highlight inequities of access to medical care in Australia.

At least since this case VAD is now available in all states - but people in rural areas need to have equal access to care as people in cities ( obviously major surgery and suchlike will only be in large city hospitals)
People with end stage terminal illnesses obviously can't travel easily - even short travels like to another hospital.
People should be able to access this equally in the hospital where they are, or the hospice or the nursing home.
The only travel for this, if the person wants it, should be to their own home.

 

[Paco Dennis]

Bretrick, this case does highlight inequities of access to medical care in Australia.

At least since this case VAD is now available in all states - but people in rural areas need to have equal access to care as people in cities ( obviously major surgery and suchlike will only be in large city hospitals)
People with end stage terminal illnesses obviously can't travel easily - even short travels like to another hospital.
People should be able to access this equally in the hospital where they are, or the hospice or the nursing home.
The only travel for this, if the person wants it, should be to their own home.

That would be ideal. Unfortunately it doesn't run smoothly for so many.

 

[Aunt Mavis]

It’s a one-way ticket to Hell for the person and for those assisting. (In my opinion) My Mom fought like a prize fighter because she wanted to hang out with us longer, that’s something I’ll never ever forget. Toughest old Norwegian ever!

 

[Trish]

That is a sad situation, Bretrick, but.

I have always been against assisted suicide, not for
any religious reasons, but I see it as the thin edge
of the wedge, our Labour Party is saying that Old
Age Pensioners, are having it too easy and being
given too much money, with no, or very little tax,
to pay, if they can't change the law, to cut back the
pension, or increase the tax, the next best thing is
assisted suicide, without telling the person that they
are assisting his/her departure.

I know that that is Ultra Cynical, but that is how my
mind is working these days.

I also know that in some cases, it is a blessing, but
who will be policing such a facility?

Our Doctors probably won't care, they are striking
for more money etc., etc., etc.

Mike.

Not ultra cynical at all @Mike. We saw what happened with the Liverpool Care Pathway ("LCP").

Hospitals bribed to put patients on pathway to death: Cash incentive for NHS trusts that meet targets on Liverpool Care Pathway

What started as an option for terminally ill cancer patients morphed into the transfer of all patients deemed to be dying onto the LCP, the hospitals received a financial benefit for every patient they moved onto the LCP often without discussion or consultation with the patient or their families.

• Some hospitals set target of two-thirds of all deaths should be on the LCP.
• At least £30m in extra money handed to hospitals to achieve their goals.
• Critics warn financial incentives could influence the work of doctors.
• LCP is thought to be used in more than 100,000 cases a year.

Why on earth would we trust them again?

 

[Mike]

Below is the Hippocratic oath“, taken by all doctors in the UK, that I know!

I will use my power to help the sick to the best of my ability and
judgement; I will abstain from harming or wronging any man by it,”

A proviso, needs to be included, The patient concerned must be the one
who requests a, "Do Not Resuscitate", or if that is not possible, then the
request will have to come from a really close relative, like a spouse, or a
child, not by a politician, a doctor should be banned from such a decision,
he can ADVISE, the family but no more!

Mike.