IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/medlaw/v33y2025i3p13..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Voluntary assisted dying—Australia in an international context

Author

Listed:
  • Katrine Del Villar
  • Lindy Willmott
  • Ben P White

Abstract

Since 2017, highly prescriptive voluntary assisted dying (VAD) laws have been adopted in all Australian states and one self-governing territory. The unique features of the Australian model and salient differences between Australian states and territories are poorly understood internationally. In this article, we provide an overview of the distinctive features of the Australian model of VAD and engage in a detailed comparison with legislation regulating assisted dying or euthanasia in other jurisdictions. We focus on variations in the eligibility criteria for accessing VAD, the request and assessment process, and the permitted method/s of administration. We also consider different international regimes permitting conscientious objection and regulating institutional objection to participating in VAD. Several distinctive features of the Australian model—such as a differential timeframe to death for different medical conditions, express residency requirements, the prohibition on health practitioners initiating conversations about VAD, and legal restrictions on the availability of practitioner administration—have already served as models for other countries in enacting VAD laws. As other countries consider legalizing the practice, there is much to learn from the Australian model.

Suggested Citation

  • Katrine Del Villar & Lindy Willmott & Ben P White, 2025. "Voluntary assisted dying—Australia in an international context," Medical Law Review, Oxford University Press, vol. 33(3), pages 1-13..
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:medlaw:v:33:y:2025:i:3:p:13.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/medlaw/fwaf025
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:medlaw:v:33:y:2025:i:3:p:13.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/medlaw .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.