Tasmania has massive increase in assisted suicide deaths.

Alex in Tasmania

Tasmania to review assisted suicide law.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Tasmania legalized assisted suicide in 2022, has now announced that it will conduct a review of their assisted suicide law based on concerns related to the massive increase in assisted suicide deaths.

Several years ago, I had the opportunity to speak in Tasmania where I warned about how the assisted suicide deaths would quickly increase once legalized.

The Tasmania assisted suicide reports indicate that the number of assisted suicide approvals, prescriptions and deaths have increased substantially since legalization.  The Tasmania reports are based on October to October. Link to the Tasmania (2022/23 report). Link to the Tasmania (2023/24 report).

Tasmania assisted suicide poison supplied: 2022/23 - 32, 2023/24 - 78, 2024/25 - 142.

Tasmania assisted suicide reported deaths: 2022/23 - 27, 2023/24 - 62, 2024/25 - 109.

You will notice that the data indicates that 2 deaths in 2023-24 were reported late. 

The Tasmanian reports refer to reported assisted suicide deaths since not all of the participants are accounted for in the data.

The rate of reported deaths by assisted suicide was 2.1% of all deaths in 2024/25 which was up from 1.2% of all deaths in 2023/24.

Meg Whitfield reported for the ABC News Australia on August 15, 2026 that:

An independent review into Tasmania's VAD legislation is currently underway to assess if it is still working as intended, and what improvements are needed.

It is being led by three experts — lawyer and former governor Kate Warner, end-of-life law expert Ben White, and palliative care specialist Michael Ashby.

A final report will be handed to the government by November 1.

Comments from the Australian Medical Association President, Meg Creely, provide concerns over the direction of the review. Whitfield reported Creely as stating:

President Meg Creely said that, overwhelmingly, medical practitioners involved with VAD found it "a really rewarding part of their medical career".

However, she said there was an administrative and financial burden on doctors that needed to be addressed.

"What we hear from our members is that legal access and practical access are not necessarily the same thing," Dr Creely said.

Creely seems to be suggesting that doctors who participate in killing their patients often find the act "rewarding" but they want to be paid more.

Canada has never reviewed their euthanasia law.

When Canada legalized euthanasia in 2016, the original law (Bill C-14) required that the law be reviewed beginning in June 2020. That review never happened.

Instead Canada expanded the euthanasia law in March 2021 when it passed Bill C-7. Bill C-7 allowed people who without a terminally condition to be killed, it removed the 10-day waiting period when a person has a terminal condition, it allowed a doctor to kill an incompetent person, when that person was previously approved for euthanasia, and it allowed euthanasia for mental illness alone, which is currently scheduled to go into effect in March 2027.

After passing Bill C-7, the Canadian government established a euthanasia committee composed of 10 members of parliament and 5 Senators. The AMAD committee did not review the law but rather it examines further expansions of the law.

On July 1, 2026, the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition launched a campaign demanding a complete review of Canada's euthanasia (MAiD) law.

Please sign and share the link to our EPC petition (Petition Link)

Now that Tasmania is doing a review of their law, maybe it's time for Canada to review its euthanasia law. 

A Medical Perspective on the assisted dying debate.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

The Canberra Times in Australia published an excellent opinion article by Dr Paul Jenkins titled: A Medical Perspective on the voluntary assisted dying debate. Jenkins writes:

For 2000 years physicians have rejected killing their patient as a means of relieving suffering and mental stress.

The most common reasons for people seeking euthanasia are loss of autonomy, loss of dignity and diminished quality of life, not unrelieved pain.

To be clear, consensual voluntary withdrawal of treatment is not euthanasia. Specialist palliative care, at home or in a hospice, provides staff experienced in pain relief and mental health care.

The long-term effects on the maintenance of caring, professional patient relationships of passing this legislation may include:

• Loss of trust in the medical profession. 

• Coercion by relatives to provide physician assisted suicide. 

• The creep to involuntary euthanasia (Belgium legalised euthanasia for children in 2014). 

• The gradual defunding of palliative care. 

• Intimidation of practitioners and facilities who maintain a conscientious objection to euthanasia.
  

The World Medical Association, comprising 114 countries, has reiterated its strong commitment to the principles of medical ethics, and that utmost respect has to be maintained for human life. Therefore the WMA is firmly opposed to euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide.

The AMA's position is largely in line with that of the WMA. I urge the Legislative Assembly to reject any such legislation.

More articles on this topic:

• The World Medical Association re-affirms its opposition to euthanasia and assisted suicide (Link).  
• Australian Medical Association opposes bill to legalize euthanasia (Link).
  

Queensland Australia - Dissenting report opposing euthanasia and assisted suicide.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Dr. Mark Robinson MP in the Queensland Australia parliament and the member for Oodgeroo wrote a dissenting report to the official parliamentary report on the proposed assisted dying bill.

Link to the Dissenting report by Dr Robinson (Link).

Similar to the minority report on assisted dying written for the Western Australian parliament that was by the Hon Nick Goiran, Dr Robinson's report creates a strong basis for opposing assisted dying.

Nick Goiran wrote a 248 page report titled: License to Care not License to Kill opposing the legalization of euthanasia or assisted suicide which was meticulously researched, documenting world-wide concerns with legalizing euthanasia and assisted suicide.

Dr Robinson's dissenting report is 24 pages of strong arguements against euthanasia. Robinson first argues that since the World Medical Association and the Australian Medical Association that physicians should not be involved in interventions that have as their primary intention, the ending of a persons life, therefore acts of euthanasia and assisted suicide are unethical.

Dr Robinson then emphasizes that if proper end-of-life care and palliative care were properly available that there would be no demand for euthanasia. Robinson points out that the administration of poison has become an alternative to the lack of proper end-of-life care.

Dr Robinson then quotes Dr Philip Nitschke, also known as Australia's Dr Death, who now believes that death should be an available option for people who are "Tired of Living," Robinson explains that - Once the euthanasia genie is out of the bottle it doesn’t go back in. He states:

The flow on affect from initial legalisation has proven to be unstoppable and irreversible once introduced. What is initially proposed as a measure to help a very small number of people, said to be in intolerable physical pain, is progressively broadened to apply to thousands of people, including those with no physical medical condition. Initial procedural safeguards are also relaxed. Once you lift the lid on Pandora’s box, there’s no going back.

Many vulnerable people experience subtle pressure to take their own life – some are made to feel almost duty bound to their family or to society to end their life prematurely. When elder abuse is combined with legalised access to the administration of life-ending poisons, it inevitably leaves the most vulnerable at risk of being coerced into ending their lives by assistance to suicide or euthanasia. This results in wrongful deaths, whereby people’s lives are taken from them without their full cognisance or consent. Wrongful deaths have followed these laws everywhere they are introduced.

Queensland Parliament

Dr Robinson challenges the Queensland Voluntary Assisted Dying Bill based on the following eight “Findings”:

• Finding 1: The Bill would make it legal for one person to take the life or help end the life of another person, or to counsel or help another person to take their life. 
• Finding 2: The BiIl would increase the number of suicides in Queensland as opposed to reducing them.
• Finding 3: The Bill fails to ensure that only eligible people will be able to access assisted suicide or euthanasia. 
• Finding 4: The Bill fails to ensure that patients are offered all options to manage their illness prior to the commencement of any life-ending procedure. 
• Finding 5: The Bill fails to adequately define “suffering” to limit it to intolerable physical pain. 
• Finding 6: The Bill provides inadequate protection to those affected by a mental illness. 
• Finding 7: The Bill fails to protect the vulnerable from coercion and undue influence. 
• Finding 8: The Bill fails to safeguard the vulnerable from a prolonged, complicated or painful death as a result of the administration of a poison prescribed under the Bill’s provisions.

I encourage my readers to read Dr Robinson's dissenting report to the Queensland Parliament. There has been much pressure to extend euthanasia to every jurisdiction in Australia and I hope that cooler heads will prevail, preventing the legalization of euthanasia in Queensland.

Link to the Dissenting report by Dr Robinson MP (Link).

Terminally Ill Dying Out of Hopelessness and Abandonment.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Dr Chris Perry

Daniel Tang, reported for the Epoch Times that Dr Chris Perry, the President of the Queensland Australia Medical Association warned Queensland legislators who are debating euthanasia that terminally ill patients choose to “take poison” and die out of hopelessness or abandonment.

Tang reporting on a press conference stated:

Dr. Chris Perry said the euthanasia experience in Victoria, Canada, and Oregon in the United States—one of the earliest jurisdictions to legalise the practice—saw many candidates choose euthanasia because they felt trapped or incapacitated.

Perry stated that killing people who feel hopeless and neglected is not right:

“So, it’s not the right way to treat human beings; we should be treating human beings as we’d like to be treated with dignity and respect,”

“You don’t want people being feeling hopeless, and being neglected, not being well cared for, and ending up taking a drink which will result in them dying in 20 to 30 minutes,”

The Queensland government will likely vote on a bill to legalize euthanasia this week.

The Western Australian published an Editorial on May 22 urging the Queensland government to amend its euthanasia bill because it requires religiously affiliated medical institutions to be complicit with killing.

 

Australian euthanasia lobby want more doctors to kill.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

David Sparkes, reporting for ABC News Australia, said that the euthanasia lobby is looking for more doctors who are willing to kill. According to his report:

Victoria has had assisted dying laws since the middle of the year, but euthanasia advocates say access is still proving difficult.

They argue people trying to use the laws are being held back by a lack of accredited specialists to approve the process.

But the State Government says the number of accredited doctors IS keeping pace with the growing demand.

The Age reported that there has been 140 assisted death applications since legalization. The number who have died is unknown. The Age also reported that, during the debate to legalize assisted death, the government predicted that there would be 12 assisted deaths in the first year and 150 assisted deaths per year in the future.

The Australian Medical Association remains opposed to euthanasia and assisted suicide. This news item is designed to convince more doctors to kill.

Irresponsible media articles promote Nitschke and suicide.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

"Dr Ted"

I am shocked by the media promotion of Philip Nitschke's new suicide device. Nitschke is being compared to prominent persons and his suicide device is being promoted as an easy and painless death. A previous death device was sold by Nitschke through a fake beer brewing company.

Nitschke lost his medical license in Australia for providing suicide instructions to people with mental health issues and to a man who was suspected in the death of his wife. 

Nitschke has been a world-wide euthanasia promoter for many years and is connected to pro-suicide counseling service that included a youth suicide counseling component where he encouraged young people to contact him with the image of a teddy bear known as "Dr Ted."

It is one issue that Nitschke is so cavalier about providing pro-suicide counseling and advice; it is another issue that the media are promoting his suicide device and ideology.

Last year the World Health Organization (WHO) updated their guide: Preventing suicide: a resource for media professionals. The summary of the WHO guide states:

• Don't place stories about suicide prominently and do not unduly repeat such stories,
• Don't use language which sensationalizes or normalizes suicide, or presents it as a constructive solution to problems,
• Don't explicitly describe the method used,
• Don't provide details about the site/location,
• Don't sensationalize headlines,
• Don't use photographs, video footage or social media links.

Most of the media reports have broken all of these guidelines in their report about Nitschke's death machine.

A Psychiatrist sent me an email with the following comment about Nitschke's death machine:

This is a terrible development (particularly for our psychiatric patients).

I share the concerns of my Psychiatrist friend and I recognize that many suicidal people are not receiving the psychiatric or social support that they need and may feel compelled to contact Nitschke. Nitschke is a disturbingly dangerous man.

• Suicide promotion has led to more youth suicide in Australia.
• Australian Medical Association expels Nitschke.
• Australia's Dr Death is being investigated in 20 deaths.
• Suicide is a symptom of mental illness, not a cure for it.

Doctors urge Western Australia not to legalize euthanasia.

Alex Schadenberg

Executive Director - Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

In the past few weeks, New South Wales Australia defeated a euthanasia bill while Victoria Australia Senate just passed a bill to legalize euthanasia.

Michael Gannon, President
Australian Medical Association.

The Australian Medical Association (AMA), which opposes euthanasia, warned Western Australia to not follow Victoria's lead. Sophia Moore with News.com.au reported:

AMA president Michael Gannon told reporters on Monday that the focus should be on improving access to palliative care, rather than legalising euthanasia. 

Dr Gannon said international experience showed there would be attempts to extend euthanasia laws to people with dementia, mental illness and other forms of chronic disease. 

In the Netherlands, single women over the age of 50 with cancer or chronic illness were the primary group to seek euthanasia, and voluntary-assisted dying is available to children in Belgium. 

A 2015 AMA survey found the majority of Australian doctors oppose voluntary-assisted dying. 

"It goes to the heart of our code of ethics," he told reporters.

Moore then reported that the Western Australian Health Minister supports euthanasia. 

But WA Health Minister Roger Cook said international research done by the Victorian select committee would benefit WA's own investigation into euthanasia. 

"I personally supported euthanasia, in principle," he said.

A WA parliamentary committee investigating end of life choices has received more than 700 submissions, with a final report due in August.

• Australian Medical Association (AMA) opposes bill to legalize euthanasia.

Australian Medical Association (AMA) opposes bill to legalize euthanasia.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director - Euthanasia Prevention Coalition.

On Friday, October 20, after 26 hours of debate, the Victoria Australia State Lower House passed an assisted dying bill by a vote of 47 to 37. The bill will now be debated by the Victoria State upper house.

Michael Gannon President
Australia Medical Association

The President of the Australian Medical Association (AMA) is clear that physicians who kill their patients are contravening the code of ethics.

Michael Gannon, who was the chair of the AMA ethics committee while they debated euthanasia, and who is now the AMA President, explained the position of the Australian Medical Association in an article published in the Australian on October 20. Gannon wrote:

The AMA’s statement contains several key points. Most important, it is a positive piece, an advocacy document that calls for better end-of-life care. It calls for better education of the community on advanced care planning and the “doctrine of double effect” — that is, the notion that a death hastened by a treatment to ease suffering does not constitute euthanasia. 

Importantly, it calls for much greater investment in palliative care. 

There are similar sentiments in recommendations one to 48 of the Victorian upper house committee inquiry into end-of-life choices. Overall, this is a good report, but it was written by a group of parliamentarians known to favour EPAS. MPs did not visit jurisdictions that had elected not to implement euthanasia. They would have done well to read the detailed and careful deliberations of the House of Lords in Britain. 

It is so important that conversations on EPAS do not fail to take into account the impact such laws would have on the rest of the health system and society as a whole.

Gannon continues by emphasizing that doctors should never kill their patients.

The AMA’s statement acknowledges the diversity of opinion in the community. It acknowledges the diversity of opinion within the medical profession. 

But at its heart is a clear statement that “doctors should not be involved in interventions that have as their primary intention the ending of a person’s life”. 

I do not doubt the compassion or motives of most people promoting the bill in Victoria. I have heard numerous moving stories of the helplessness people feel when they watch a loved one die. 

Compassion is what drives doctors. It is at the heart of our code of ethics. I do not lack compassion for those who have watched a loved one die. ... 

The Victorian parliament has other opportunities to improve the end-of-life care it provides its citizens. That people suffer painful or prolonged deaths should be a clarion call to improve end-of-life care.

Gannon then focuses on the almost unanimous opposition to euthanasia held by national medical associations. Gannon writes:

At the recent World Medical Association meeting in Chicago, we endorsed what was only the fourth editorial revision of the 1947 Declaration of Geneva. At the heart of medical ethics is the sanctity of human life. 

It is not surprising that 107 of 109 national medical associations affiliated with the WMA have statements opposing EPAS. This includes the US and Germany, nations with one form or another of EPAS law.

Gannon finishes his article by emphasizing that euthanasia and assisted suicide contravene the code of ethics for physicians.

Euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide are at odds with modern and ancient codes of medical ethics. Every life is precious: the 10-year-old boy in Roebourne with foetal alcohol spectrum disorder and severe autism, the 36-year-old veteran with post-traumatic stress disorder, the 68-year-old woman in Morwell with metastatic cancer and no children to be with her as she dies. 

I do not seek to diminish or demean the opinions of those doctors who hold a different view to AMA policy. This debate is vexed. It is difficult. 

But the AMA’s position statement — which I was elected to prosecute, protect and promote — is the result of thousands of hours of work supported by generations of wisdom and ethics.

The Victoria Australia upper house needs to reject the euthanasia bill.

Australian health professionals say NO to assisted suicide.

This was published by HOPE Australia on October 11, 2017

From around Australia, 383 health professionals have signed a statement rejecting assisted suicide and euthanasia, reaffirming the role of doctors, nurses and allied health as saving lives and providing real care and support. ​

Read their statement below:

We endorse the views of the World Medical Association that physician assisted suicide and euthanasia are unethical, even if made legal. We endorse the Australian Medical Association position that "doctors should not be involved in interventions that have as their primary intention the ending of a person’s life." 

We also endorse the World Health Organisation definition of Palliative Care, which has been re-affirmed by the Australia & New Zealand Society of Palliative Medicine, that Palliative Care aims to deliver impeccable holistic and person centred care without the aim of foreshortening life. 

We are committed to the concept of death with dignity and comfort, including the provision of effective pain relief and excellence in Palliative Care. 

We uphold the right of a patient to decline treatment. 

We know that the provision of pain relief, even if it may unintentionally hasten death of the patient, is ethical and legal. Equally the withdrawal or withholding of futile treatment in favour of Palliative Care is also ethical and legal. 

We believe that crossing the line to intentionally assist a person to suicide would fundamentally weaken the doctor-patient relationship, which is based on trust and respect. The power of the clinician/patient relationship cannot be over-estimated. 

We are especially concerned with protecting vulnerable people who can feel they have become a burden to others, and are committed to supporting those who find their own life situations a heavy burden. We believe such laws would undermine the public perception of the dignity and value of human life in all its different stages and conditions. Government focus should be on the compassionate and equitable provision of Social Services, Health Care and Palliative Care. 

Doctors and Healthcare Professionals are not necessary for the legalisation or practice of assisted suicide. Their involvement is being sought only to provide a cloak of medical legitimacy. Leave doctors, nurses and allied health professionals to focus on saving lives and providing real care and support for those who are suffering.

Link to the names of the Health professionals who signed the statement.