SAVES is not affiliated with Exit International / Dr Philip Nitschke and opposes the public availability of a 'peaceful pill'.

SAVES has now reached another milestone in its history of advocacy for law reform to allow choice in dying for the hopelessly and terminally ill. The society's first meeting was held 20 years ago on November 25th 1983, with the first edition of the VE Bulletin following in January 1984. This reported on the passage of the Natural Death Act 1983, guaranteeing the right of competent adults to reject extraordinary measures employed to prolong life. Arguably this expression of growing respect for patient autonomy paved the way for subsequent more comprehensive legislation concerning end-of-life decision making.

SAVES held discussions with the Minister of Health concerning the Natural Death Act and then the Consent to Medical Treatment and Palliative Care Act 1995. The society gave support to the Quirke and Levy private member bills in the 1990s, which would have allowed choice for voluntary euthanasia under strict guidelines. SAVES also campaigned against the Euthanasia Laws Act, often referred to as the Andrew's Bill, which overturned the NT Rights of the Terminally Ill Act. We are currently supporting the Dignity in Dying Bill, which is before both houses of State Parliament.

The society's role continues to be one promoting community awareness, engaging in political activity, and maintaining international liaison through the World Federation of Right to Die Societies. The society's Fact Sheets and excerpts from SAVES handbook Right to Choose are reproduced by educational bodies in Australia and overseas.

The last 20 years have seen extraordinary progress in consciousness raising, ongoing debate and incremental legal reforms around the world. Overwhelming support for choice-in-dying means that law reform is inevitable, even if difficult to achieve. As Flinders University ethicist Dr Brian Stoffell claims, in respect of our prohibitive law, 'cruelty is the principal vice and institutionalised cruelty is worse than the odd cruel episode'.

The growing awareness of societal harm caused by such cruelty, including flouting of the law and tragic recourse to self-deliverance, is why the legal status-quo is no longer supported by the vast majority of the community.

Advocating for the 'right to choose' in law remains our focus as SAVES moves into its third decade.

Julia Anaf