Australia’s euthanasia laws are facing the prospect of a constitutional crisis, with a plan to allow religious aged care homes to reject voluntary assisted dying on their premises facing a challenge from a prominent lawyer. Source: The Australian.
The Liberals have made a fresh bid to change Voluntary Assisted Dying laws in New South Wales that would give faith-based aged care providers the right to choose whether patients can access euthanasia in their facilities, in line with Victoria, Tasmania and Western Australia.
But one of the country’s leading silks, Arthur Moses SC, has attempted to block the reform on the basis that it would be “constitutionally invalid”, reigniting a showdown over religious freedoms in the aged care sector.
In advice filed to NSW parliament last week, Mr Moses and law professor Patrick Keyzer argued that NSW faith-based facilities cannot refuse patients’ right to receive euthanasia on their premises as this would go against federal law, which guarantees an individual’s right to have their “needs, goals and preferences for end-of-life care” met by aged care services.
Liberal upper house MP Susan Carter, who introduced the amendment last week to NSW Parliament, said the reform aimed to balance the rights of patients, their fellow residents and providers.
Under the law change, faith-based providers would still be required to help patients access VAD by transporting them off-site to state and private facilities for consultations and appointments, as with any other medical matter.
Religious freedoms expert Mark Fowler questioned why Mr Moses and Dr Keyzer had opposed the reform, given the law had been enshrined in other states.
He also argued the United Nations declaration on religious discrimination protects the right to run institutions in accordance with “the freedom of religion or belief”.
The push to change VAD laws has sparked fierce resistance from health and legal circles, with 18 organisations recently signing a joint statement against the legislation.
FULL STORY
Euthanasia laws face constitutional challenge from top lawyer in aged care debate (By Elizabeth Pike, The Australian)
