Assisted suicide politics in Australia

The support for voluntary euthanasia crossed party lines; the majority of Greens voters (86 per cent), three quarters of Labor voters (75 per cent), and a little more than two thirds of Coalition voters (69 per cent) were in favour.

The Coalition is comprised of two parties, and they are in government. They are a centre right camp comprised of conservatives and liberals/libertarians.

Labour as the name sounds is a centre left party that pivots off the Union movements.

It has the highest backing from people over 55 years of age.

Among the different religions, 68 per cent of Protestants and Catholics supported euthanasia, while a fifth of both faiths were against it.

Both the NSW Liberal National Party and the Labor Party is opposed to assisted-suicide and allow their MPs a conscience vote on the issue.

The Australian Voluntary Euthenasia Party lobbies for legislation of dying only if: * the person is of sound mind and the decision to end his or her life has been made freely, voluntarily and after due consideration; and * two medical practitioners have confirmed that the person has an eligible medical condition.

Australias libertarian party, the Liberal Dems believe in assisted suicide for "rational" people.

The Sex party, another libertarian party has similar policy to the VUP. The Greens, a more mainstream progressive party (third largest after the Liberals (main partner in the Coalition) and Labor), have roughly the same policy (those with 'decision making capacity').

They're concerned about a backlash from religious organisations that would campaign against them, or bring public pressure against them and that means they're essentially silenced," he said.

Mr Parker said that before the 2011 state election, Catholic bishops leafleted his electorate and urged people not to vote for him.

"A lot of conservative MPs really fear that," Mr Parker said

but assisted suicide happens anyway for 'rational' people with 'decision making capacity'

He also said with expert palliative care, nobody should suffer at the end of their lives, although he was aware that heavy sedation sometimes leads to death.

"The person gradually dies because they're not ingesting food and that's a tricky way of doctors carrying out euthanasia without declaring it euthanasia," he said.

Constitutional lawyer Professor George Williams said there was no real data on how many assisted suicides take place in palliative care.

I think that, as a rationalist community, we have a position where we can see rationality as a very, very complex spectrum. It seems absurd to decide that one person is rational enough to act to cure their pain, or that they aren't. But that's just what I think. I'm interested in hearing other thoughts out there. And, the unasked question of interest - why should someone have to have a terminal illness or be in severe pain to die? They can die anyway - there are plenty of modes of suicide out there. Differences will be the cleanup, the shock to others who are living, and the psychological pain further imposed on the suicidal. The inefficacy of say, antidepressants on many people, and that of alternative and experimental treatment is well documented. There are many, many like that.

Quotes from ABC