If you slide far enough down the slippery slope envisioned by opponents of medical assistance-in-dying (MAiD), you eventually land in a ghastly society with industrialized euthanasia, rampant suicide, and devalued life. But what if the slippery slope leads us somewhere better? This paper explores the benefits of eliminating nearly all MAiD prohibitions and regulations. We anticipate three positive effects for public health: 1. Expanded access to those currently not qualified from MAiD by removing ineffective access criteria; 2. Harm reduction by (...) making MAiD safer and by rerouting suicidal patients into alternate care; and 3. Improvements to the health system through lowered healthcare costs and increased patient activation in end-of-life care. Safeguards and prohibitions deny those who wish to die the ability to do so to prevent the _potential_ danger of a few being subjected to an undesired early death. (shrink)

In jurisdictions where voluntary assisted dying is legal, eligibility assessments, prescription and administration of a VAD substance are commonly performed by senior doctors. Junior doctors’ involvement is limited to a range of more peripheral aspects of patient care relating to VAD. In the Australian state of Victoria, where VAD has been legal since June 2019, all health professionals have a right under the legislation to conscientiously object to involvement in the VAD process, including provision of information about VAD. While this (...) protection appears categorical and straightforward, conscientious objection to VAD-related care is ethically complex for junior doctors for reasons that are specific to this group of clinicians. For junior doctors wishing to exercise a conscientious objection to VAD, their dependence on their senior colleagues for career progression creates unique risks and burdens. In a context where senior colleagues are supportive of VAD, the junior doctor’s subordinate position in the medical hierarchy exposes them to potential significant harms: compromising their moral integrity by participating, or compromising their career progression by objecting. In jurisdictions intending to provide all health professionals with meaningful conscientious objection protection in relation to VAD, strong specific support for junior doctors is needed through local institutional policies and culture. There are no data in this work. (shrink)

In their analysis of the eligibility criteria for assisted dying in Canada, Downie and Schuklenk put forward a strong argument for the ethical defensibility of including mental illnesses and disabilities as underlying conditions driving a person’s request for assisted dying.1 In this commentary, we add a view on these debates from our home state of Victoria, Australia, where voluntary assisted dying has been legal since June 2019. We highlight the more conservative approach to eligibility in our setting compared with Canada, (...) and argue for debates about eligibility criteria to be conceptualised as part of a broader discussion about access to assisted dying that includes clinicians’ roles and perspectives. In our view, clinicians’ perspectives may have a significant impact on individuals’ ability to access assisted dying, regardless of legislative or other changes made to any system. ‘Voluntary assisted dying’ is the terminology used in our context, rather than Medical Assistance in Dying, so we will use that term when referring to the Victorian system. There are several key differences between the Canadian and Victorian approaches that are important in relation to the debates addressed by Downie and Schuklenk. First, the emphasis in Victoria is on patient self-administration of the VAD …. (shrink)

In the Australian state of Victoria, legislation allowing voluntary assisted dying (VAD) passed through parliament in November 2017. There was then an eighteen-month period before the start date for patient access to VAD, referred to as the “implementation period.” The implementation period was intended to allow time for the relevant government department and affected organizations to develop processes before the Act came into effect in June 2019. This qualitative interview study investigates the perspectives of a multidisciplinary sample of twelve clinicians (...) from a single metropolitan hospital during this implementation period. Maximum variation sampling was utilized to ensure breadth across discipline (medical, nursing, allied health), speciality, and stated level of support for the VAD legislation. Four key themes were identified from the interview data: preparing for the unknown, ethical diversity within the organization, building a respectful culture, and concerns about the inability of the legislated approach to capture clinical nuances. Overall, these clinicians’ workplace experiences during the implementation period were shaped by the ethical diversity within their organization and a sense of uncertainty about how the VAD legislation would integrate with the practical realities of their clinical setting. The concept of “ethical diversity” could be a useful one for supporting staff in an organization during a VAD implementation period. (shrink)

BackgroundNo laws or official guidelines govern voluntary assisted dying (VAD) in Japan. A legislative bill on the termination of life-sustaining measures has yet to be sent to deliberations for legislation, due to strong opposition that has prevented it from being submitted to the Diet. However, Japan has recently witnessed several cases involving VAD.Main textAgainst this backdrop, we argue that Japan should begin discussion on VAD legislation, referring to the Voluntary Assisted Dying Act 2017 (VADA2017), which was established in 2017 in (...) Victoria, Australia. VADA2017 puts in place a wide range of stringent safeguards and is considered worldwide to be the safest and most conservative policy on a physician offering assisted dying based on the patient’s premeditated request. We consider what opposing opinions from society would arise in response to the VADA2017. Among these will include arguments against VAD itself, those against the validation of this act, and opinions that oppose even the initiation of the dialogue on VAD.ConclusionsWe conclude that to protect the right to life among those placed in vulnerable positions and, at the same time, to respect decision-making of those who wish for immediate death due to unbearable suffering, the dialogue must immediately begin with that on introducing a policy more conservative than that of the VADA2017, which solidly considers arguments against VAD. (shrink)