Lainie Anderson: Far from being ignored, conservative views constructively added to the SA legislation

Conservative Christian voices weren’t ignored in SA’s euthanasia breakthrough, they just didn’t get their own way, writes Lainie Anderson.

When you spend time at SA’s Parliament House, two things become evident: there’s a healthy respect for religious institutions; and MPs as a cohort seem far more religious than the wider population.

You might be surprised, for example, to learn the Lord’s Prayer is still read out at the start of every parliamentary sitting day, and is enthusiastically recited by many MPs.

(Victoria’s Labor government will scrap the prayer if re-elected, in favour of a model which might include a Welcome to Country and a moment’s silence for MPs to reflect on their responsibility to constituents. Got to say, I like the idea.)

When former Labor ministers Jack Snelling and Tom Kenyon last month declared they were quitting the ALP to re-form the conservative Family First party, they cited the recent voluntary assisted dying debate as an example of religious views no longer having a voice among the major parties.

Former South Australian Labor MP Tom Kenyon. Picture: Ben Macmahon

I’ve always got on well with Mr Snelling and Mr Kenyon.

But as someone who sat in meetings while individual MPs struggled to reconcile their faith with the facts around voluntary assisted dying, I respectfully disagree with their characterisation of the debate.

When I say there’s a “healthy” respect for the state’s religious institutions in our state parliament, I mean it in the truest sense of the word: There’s respect but there’s no longer capitulation – and nor should there be in a secular democracy.

Many politicians who spoke on Labor MP Kyam Maher’s private member’s Bill (another misconception is this was a Liberal initiative – it wasn’t) talked of putting their own faith aside to respect the overwhelming views of constituents.

As Health Minister Stephen Wade said: “While my Christian faith teaches me that euthanasia is not an option for me, in a pluralist society other people … should have the freedom to live their lives according to their values and their moral codes, as long as their actions do not cause harm to others.”

The SA legislation has 70 safeguards to ensure it’s accessible only to terminally ill people with intolerable suffering at end of life. SA was the fourth state to pass similar legislation. And 80 per cent of South Australians support it, including 75 per cent of those identifying as religious.

Far from being ignored, conservative views constructively added to the SA legislation. In the other three states, individual doctors have the legislated right to conscientiously object to being involved but, for the first time in Australia, faith-based hospitals in SA also have a legislated right to conscientiously object.

Institutional conscientious objection was not extended to faith-based residential aged care because under federal legislation that’s considered a person’s home, where everyone should be allowed choice.

As the voluntary spokesperson for Voluntary Assisted Dying SA, I acknowledge a conflict here.

However, with Family First considering preference deals with candidates aligned to conservative views, it’s only fair to point out MPs on all sides of politics did not actively disrespect religious institutions or even religious views when voting with their conscience on voluntary assisted dying.

Some MPs visited terminal patients in hospital to hear their pleas for a better way to die. Many met families who watched loved ones suffer protracted, painful deaths. All received hundreds of letters detailing heartfelt, often tragic stories.

Those MPs deserve our thanks for putting their personal views aside to make death more humane for the rest of us – I hope voters remember that come March.

Originally published as Lainie Anderson: Far from being ignored, conservative views constructively added to the SA legislation