Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 2 Hansard (26 February) . . Page.. 501 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

Our amendments that Mr Moore has incorporated in this present Bill basically required that much more detailed information be given to the coroner, including all palliative care options offered to the patient. This will be an incentive for medical practitioners to seek advice from palliative care experts if necessary. They also made it a requirement for the medical practitioner to whom the request to terminate life is made to be familiar with the medical history of the person making the request, especially in relation to the history of the illness which has led to the terminal phase. Continuity of care is obviously an essential element in good health care.

The purpose of the amendment regarding medical records was twofold. Accountability is increased by the requirement that the medical practitioner keep a separate written record of details regarding the request for euthanasia, and this record must go to the coroner. It is to be signed by the patient as well as the medical practitioner. The coroner would also be required to give the Attorney-General more detailed information on the operation of the Act.

Mr Temporary Deputy Speaker, in conclusion, I would like to remind members that the issue of euthanasia is a conscience decision in the Greens. I have, accordingly, made a decision to support this legislation according to my conscience after reading extensively, after listening to people from all sides of the debate and after deliberating over the issue for many hours.

MS McRAE (5.03): My position on euthanasia is known. I have spoken in this debate before. My party's position on euthanasia is known, and I was elected with many people knowing both my party's policy and my position. However, I guess that it is still important to just reiterate some of the key points as I see them, given that the debate has moved from our small chamber into the national arena. I feel that it is important that those people who are willing to support these Bills actually state their position, particularly since it is a conscience vote, where each comes to the decision for different reasons and considering different aspects of life and death, as we do so.

I begin by putting on record my respect for the people who do not support my position and do not support legalising euthanasia. I have a deep respect for that position. I believe that they are motivated by the same deep respect for life as I have. The trouble with the debate as it has gone thus far is that it has polarised us and put some people on the side of the devil and others on the side of the good. I think it is grossly unfair. I think that all people involved in the debate are grappling with the same complex issue and are motivated, in most cases, by the deepest of concern, both for the individuals involved that we talk about and for the principles involved. So, I in no way want to be categorised as having no respect or no concern for people who choose to be on the other side of this debate.

However, where I am willing to go is driven by a deep concern for the autonomy and dignity of individual human beings and for their right to that dignity. I do not accept that this debate is about palliative care. I give my commitment, here and now, that I will do all I can to ensure that palliative care is always well funded and readily available to those in the ACT. I find it grossly offensive to be put in the position, by supporting this Bill,

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .