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

The 8th Australian Palliative Care conference, "New Horizons", was held in Sydney this year from 30th August - 2nd September. One of the themes was "New Challenges and New Dilemmas", within which voluntary euthanasia could have been most appropriately included. We applied for an exhibition booth as we did for the conference in 2003, but were once again turned away. Being convinced of the necessity for a voluntary euthanasia presence, Mary and I attended for one day, with our expenses paid most generously by NSW VES. At one of the plenary sessions I asked the following question:

I have only been able to attend today's sessions and have been very heartened by the commitment of those working in Palliative Care and the efficacy of treatments available. It is widely acknowledged however, including by Palliative Care Australia, that even with optimal palliative care, not all people's suffering can be alleviated. Between five and ten per cent is the figure. We know that voluntary euthanasia is requested by these people as the only means of final relief. Earlier sessions today discussed the "Respecting Patient Choices" programme - do we only respect those choices we are comfortable with? Without legal choice for voluntary euthanasia what does Palliative Care propose for this minority? I ask also, respectfully, why VE hasn't been included as a topic here, with an exhibition booth of information?"

The reply was that palliative care and voluntary euthanasia are separate and "we don’t kill our patients in palliative care"; a simplistic answer that denies the worth of people with intractable suffering, denies the reality of that suffering and leaves palliative care sorely lacking.

The Palliative Care Council of South Australia states its first object as "To advocate the needs, rights and interests of people who are dying and those who care for them." Palliative Care Australia’s 1999 Position Paper on Voluntary Euthanasia acknowledges that palliative care is unable to relieve suffering in all cases and that people rationally request voluntary euthanasia. However, it then states the organisation’s philosophical objection to voluntary euthanasia. What a dilemma! How can this be justified? This inconsistency in principle leads to an abandonment of the minority who cannot be helped. Surely Palliative Care has a duty of care to all dying patients.

Through talking with people at the conference, those who are at the beds administering palliative care, I know that some are not comfortable with the official response to voluntary euthanasia. Both they and their patients suffer because of unrealistic boundaries of care that effectively perpetuate suffering. I sincerely hope they will lead a new direction, meeting the challenge and solving the dilemma by supporting choice for voluntary euthanasia as a concept of care, complementary to palliative care. If not, palliative care will be seen to be advocating only conditional compassion.