Australian Centre for Health Law Research, Faculty of Business and Law, Queensland University of Technology, GPO Box 2434, Brisbane, QLD, 4001, Australia.
Centre for Health Equity, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, 3010, Australia.
J Bioeth Inq. 2023 Sep;20(3):467-484. doi: 10.1007/s11673-023-10271-6. Epub 2023 Jul 10.
Victoria was the first Australian state to legalize voluntary assisted dying (elsewhere known as physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia). Some institutions indicated they would not participate in voluntary assisted dying. The Victorian government issued policy approaches for institutions to consider OBJECTIVE: To describe and analyse publicly available policy documents articulating an institutional objection to voluntary assisted dying in Victoria.
Policies were identified using a range of strategies, and those disclosing and discussing the nature of an institutional objection were thematically analysed using the framework method.
The study identified fifteen policies from nine policymakers and developed four themes: (1) extent of refusal to participate in VAD, (2) justification for refusal to provide VAD, (3) responding to requests for VAD, and (4) appeals to state-sanctioned regulatory mechanisms. While institutional objections were stated clearly, there was very little practical detail in most documents to enable patients to effectively navigate objections in practice.
This study demonstrates that despite having clear governance pathways developed by centralized bodies (namely, the Victorian government and Catholic Health Australia), many institutions' public-facing policies do not reflect this guidance. Since VAD is contentious, laws governing institutional objection could provide greater clarity and regulatory force than policies alone to better balance the interests of patients and non-participating institutions.
维多利亚州是澳大利亚第一个将自愿协助死亡(在其他地方也称为医生协助自杀和安乐死)合法化的州。一些机构表示他们不会参与自愿协助死亡。维多利亚州政府发布了机构考虑的政策方法。
描述和分析公开的政策文件,阐明维多利亚州机构对自愿协助死亡的反对意见。
使用多种策略确定政策,并使用框架方法对主题进行分析,以探讨机构对自愿协助死亡的反对意见。
该研究从九个决策者那里确定了十五项政策,并确定了四个主题:(1)拒绝参与 VAD 的程度;(2)拒绝提供 VAD 的理由;(3)对 VAD 请求的回应;(4)呼吁国家批准的监管机制。虽然明确表达了机构反对意见,但大多数文件几乎没有提供实际细节,以使患者能够在实践中有效地应对反对意见。
本研究表明,尽管中央机构(即维多利亚州政府和天主教健康澳大利亚)制定了明确的治理途径,但许多机构的面向公众的政策并未反映出这一指导意见。由于 VAD 存在争议,管理机构反对的法律可以比政策本身提供更大的清晰度和监管力度,以更好地平衡患者和不参与机构的利益。