Page 3195 - Week 11 - Wednesday, 21 September 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
nor does it differentiate between physical and emotional pain. Furthermore, it does not state that a health professional may not directly and intentionally end the patient's life.
While it is true that, in rare cases, attempts to control pain may result in shortening the life of a patient, that is not at issue in Clause 22. It is well recognised that many legitimate medical interventions carry risks of death. However, the purpose of these interventions is not to induce death.
The wording of Clause 22 would allow a doctor or nurse to act with the intention of killing the patient as long as the health professional contended that the intent was to relieve pain or suffering. This, in fact, endorses the killing of patients as a means of ending their suffering. Current legal prohibitions against mercy killings would be rendered inoperative as is clearly evidenced by the words "Notwithstanding the provisions of any other law of the Territory".
As I said, I have some serious concerns with the Bill, as I know some other members do. She goes on to say:
In the Netherlands, as well, physicians acknowledge giving intentional overdoses of pain medication to patients. According to an official Dutch Government report, 8,100 patients die annually of intentional overdose of pain medication. Physicians have clearly admitted that the amount of medication administered has been given with the purpose of killing the patient.
MR MOORE (10.44), in reply: Madam Speaker, in starting my speech I would like to clarify something that I have said in the Assembly and publicly with reference to the position of Bishop Power on this Bill. The committee did write to Bishop Power and we did get a letter from the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference. That is whom Bishop Power was representing. Getting this letter out of archives took me some time, but I now have it and I would like to share with members the first paragraph. It says:
Dear Mr Moore,
Bishop Power, who is out of Canberra for a short time, has passed to me copies of your letter of 25 February and the confidential draft Medical Treatment Bill 1994.
It then goes on to say:
Given that the Bill is confidential, and that comment is requested within a very short time, I presume that the following comments will be treated with equal confidentiality.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .