The Australian Medical Association (AMA) is intensifying its advocacy for federal legislative changes that would permit doctors to utilize telehealth services for discussions surrounding voluntary assisted dying (VAD). This renewed push comes in response to recent political developments, including the planned reintroduction of a VAD Bill by Independent Federal Member for Curtin, Kate Chaney MP, and the Australian Labor Party’s decision to formally include support for telehealth in VAD care within its national platform.
Addressing Legal Barriers to Telehealth in VAD
AMA President Dr. Danielle McMullen highlighted the current legal framework as a significant impediment. Federal legislation, originally enacted long before the legalization of VAD in any Australian state or territory, prohibits the use of ‘carriage services’ – encompassing telephones, video conferences, and emails – for publishing or distributing material that counsels or incites suicide. Dr. McMullen emphasized that these provisions were not designed to encompass legitimate medical services like VAD consultations.
“The AMA has long called for changes to federal legislation that currently make it an offence to use a ‘carriage service’ (such as a telephone, videoconference, email or other forms of electronic communication) to publish or distribute material that counsels or incites suicide,” Dr. McMullen stated. “These provisions were drafted well before VAD was legalised anywhere in Australia and were not intended to capture a lawful medical service.”
Ensuring Equitable Access for Patients
The AMA argues that classifying VAD consultations under laws designed to prevent suicide incitement creates undue hardship for patients, particularly those residing in regional, rural, and remote areas, as well as individuals too unwell to travel. This legal mismatch effectively denies equitable access to a legally available end-of-life option for many Australians.
“Patients in regional, rural and remote Australia — and those too unwell to travel — are being denied equitable access to a legally available choice, because of outdated laws that were never designed with voluntary assisted dying in mind,” Dr. McMullen explained. “The AMA’s position is that telehealth should operate for VAD as a valuable complement to in-person care, and not a replacement for clinically necessary physical attendances.”
The Role of Telehealth in Modern Medical Practice
Dr. McMullen underscored the indispensable role of telehealth in contemporary healthcare, particularly in extending medical reach to underserved populations. She noted that telehealth enables doctors to connect with patients when physical visits are impractical, unnecessary, or inappropriate, thereby facilitating care in isolated communities and reducing the logistical and financial burdens associated with long-distance travel.
The AMA advocates for the integration of telehealth into VAD care, provided it adheres to stringent regulations, robust protections, and established professional standards. The association believes that VAD consultations can be effectively and safely conducted via telehealth, mirroring the approach taken for other medical services.
“Voluntary assisted dying consultations could be undertaken via telehealth in accordance with appropriate regulations and protections, consistent with professional standards and good medical practice,” Dr. McMullen added.
Call to Action for Legislative Reform
In light of these concerns, the AMA is urging the Attorney-General to expedite amendments to the federal Criminal Code. The proposed amendments would create a specific exemption for lawful communications related to voluntary assisted dying. By carving out this exception, the AMA aims to prevent Commonwealth law from inadvertently undermining the lawful VAD schemes established by states and territories, ensuring that legal and medical advancements are not hindered by outdated legislation.
The association’s advocacy centers on aligning federal law with the evolving landscape of VAD legislation across Australia, thereby removing unnecessary obstacles and ensuring that patients can access all available legal options for end-of-life care, regardless of their geographical location or physical condition.
