MPs reveal personal pain as Voluntary Assisted Dying laws debated

Emotional MPs from all side of politics have spoken of watching loved ones die painful deaths as state parliament debates historic voluntary assisted dying laws.

Opposition Leader David Crisafulli has revealed he will vote against historic voluntary assisted dying laws as his deputy moved 54 amendments to enhance safeguards for the scheme amid emotive speeches from MPs.

After refusing to publicly reveal his stance for months, Mr Crisafulli on Tuesday declared he could not support the “flawed legislation” while questioning why people would be able to access VAD before they qualified for palliative care.

“That doesn’t seem like a free choice to me,” he said.

The first of three days of highly-anticipated debate kicked off yesterday with emotional MPs from all side of politics speaking of watching loved ones die painful deaths and at times taking moments to compose themselves.

Health Minister Yvette D’Ath broke down in tears as she revealed how her late mother would have chosen death instead of a debilitating battle with Alzheimer’s disease.

Opposition Leader David Crisafulli will vote against Voluntary Assisted Dying laws. Picture: NCA NewsWire / John Gass

The senior government Minister said she would support VAD but would vote against Opposition amendments to expand the scheme to people with a neurological illness.

Ms D’Ath acknowledged as many people as possible should have access to the scheme but said any expansion must be given proper legal consideration to avoid unintended consequences.

“My mother died of Alzheimer’s,” she said.

“I know what she’d choose, she’d choose VAD … we had discussions about life and death.”

The Minister said palliative care would be strengthened and reformed to ensure people have adequate care at the end of their life.

Opposition frontbencher Tim Nicholls, who hadn’t previously revealed his stance, said his Liberal values which promote the “freedom of the individual” meant he would support VAD.

Mr Nicholls, the Opposition’s Attorney-General spokesman, said the legislation provided a “fair and reasonable” balance between faith-based organisations and the wishes of the individual.

“When it must, it comes down in favour of the dying individual,” he said.

He warned against any amendments which would “frustrate, delay and deny” VAD to people requesting it.

Deputy Opposition Leader David Janetzki. Picture: NCA NewsWire / John Gass

Meanwhile Deputy Opposition Leader David Janetzki tabled 54 amendments including only allowing a person to access VAD if their condition was incurable.

He said 2000 years of medical and legal practice in preserving the dignity of life would be overturned under the laws and that the elderly, sick and vulnerable were often pressured into feeling like a burden which would influence their decision making.

He asked: “If for patients who are terminally ill, why not for those who are not terminal?”

“The qualification of intractable and unbearable pain may come to include those with chronic fatigue, depression, anorexia,” he said.

Another amendment proposed by Mr Janetzki stipulates that a psychiatrist or psychologist must determine whether a person has decision-making capacity, which is a shift away from the proposed laws which provides that a person is presumed to have that capacity.

Mr Janetzki also wants pharmacists and social workers to be able to exercise a conscientious objection, while a number of new offences have been proposed, such as making it illegal for a health care worker to have material relating to VAD on premises where the worker provides health services or personal care services.

Meanwhile the final heartbreaking words of his dying father have convinced Minister Mark Furner to support VAD after months of internal reflection.

“I will never forget the final words of my father,” he said.

“He said just let me go, just let me go – that’s why I will be supporting this Bill.”

The Ferny Grove MP said he was “envious of those who were able to come to a quick decision” when considering the issue.

Mr Crisafulli said while his “heart hurts” for the people facing terminal illness, he could not support the “flawed legislation”.

“I believe this bill unintentionally, but unavoidably, puts a lesser value on the life of the poor, the remote, the sick,” he said.

“I believe the intention of the Bill is to offer choice, but the reality is that it offers choice on a sliding scale that is in proportion to the size of your bank account or where you live.

“But most importantly it breaks a fundamental tenet of our society – that human life is sacrosanct.

“I can’t support something that offers the assistance of the state to terminate their life –

the same state that does not give them the option of specialist palliative care in the same time frame.”

Mr Crisafulli said considering VAD had been an “emotionally exhausting experience” and the gravity of the decision was not lost on anyone.

Traeger MP Robbie Katter moved an amendment, calling for VAD to be put on the shelf until an extra $270m was allocated to palliative care.

Mr Katter said he feared the Bill would be applied differently by people outside of the southeast and that one person told him there was “not enough health care out there for me” and decided he wanted to die.

“You’re not going to say this isn’t a rich versus poor thing,” he said.

Mr Katter said he would vote against VAD, arguing it will mark a departure from the cornerstone of civilisation to preserve life.

But Ms D’Ath labelled his amendment as “a stunt” and unnecessary.

The Katter’s amendment was defeated 53-37.