A failure of moral leadership

Recently, opposition leader Daniel Andrews has also stated that he will not introduce a reform of this nature if elected. Instead, he announced a revision of the Medical Treatment Act to permit refusal of medical treatment for future conditions. At present, the Act permits refusal of treatment only for current conditions.

While a welcome reform, it is a small measure and is no substitute for assisted dying reform. Why do either side of politics assume that refusing medical treatment will suddenly eliminate intolerable suffering at the end of life? It doesn't. And for many dying Victorians, there is no treatment to refuse.

Whether they would use an assisted dying law or not, millions of Victorians are clear that they expect the respect of their State to make their own decisions at end of life.

Referral of the matter to the Law Reform Commission which would afford Victorians a voice in formal, open and robust discussion. Yet our 'leaders' actively refuse. If those resolutely opposed to assisted dying law reform were so very confident of their arguments against, they would welcome the referral so they could put their case.

Dr Napthine and Mr Andrews must explain to the electorate before polling day why it is that they expect their own personal opposition to this reform to trounce the consciences of millions of Victorians.

As Oregon legislator Senator Ginny Burdick explained to Mr Smith and me, "This is just a very, very positive addition to your health care options at the end of life. It is a compassionate measure that will help a lot of people, whether or not they actually use it."