When this happens we need to be ready to instruct our political representatives about the type of legislation we wish to have in our community.

Let's acknowledge upfront that some people, as a matter of faith and/or ethics, regard the intentional ending of human life as unacceptable, regardless of circumstances. Nevertheless, there is growing acceptance in most Western populations that when life becomes unbearable, with no prospects for improvement, people should, if they wish, have available to them the capacity to end it. Suicide is not illegal in Australia, but the currently available mechanisms for ending life, for a person who has decided on it, are much worse for both the person and their loved ones than simply taking a pill or receiving a lethal injection in an appropriate setting.

Whenever voluntary assisted dying is discussed, concerns are raised about "the slippery slope". This refers to the concern that once certain practices such as voluntary assisted dying become accepted, they could lead to "unwanted euthanasia" - or that there is a danger that people in certain situations will feel obliged to end their lives when they do not want to. So, legislators need to craft the legislation in ways to avoid these possibilities.

We are now able to look at the experience in Europe, Canada, New Zealand, several US states and three states in Australia which have legalised voluntary assisted dying under specific circumstances. In the Australian states which have acted on this matter so far, legal access is restricted to people with certified incurable physical disease, deep suffering and no more than six to 12 months of life expectancy. To meet the requirements of the act, people wishing to end their lives must be assessed medically to ensure they meet this criterion, as does the soundness of their mental state in making the request. Mental illness alone is not seen as an acceptable reason.

READ MORE:

The recent television documentary Laura's Choice illustrates the Swiss approach, which is much less restrictive, less medically constrained and less bureaucratic than the approach that is now legal in Victoria and Western Australia. Could the Swiss approach have appeal for the ACT?

I personally think it could, but at the outset, unlike the Swiss model, it should not be accessible to non-residents of the territory.

One of the issues that no current Australian legislation addresses relates to dementia. Knowing the risk of dementia in the elderly, many of us believe that if it happened we would want to end our life, in preference to wasting away in a nursing home. With the growing use of advance care planning by many Australians, an individual's stated preference for what should happen in the event of such a possibility should be respected. For this to happen, the individual's appointee with power of attorney would need to be confident that this preference was stated when the individual was in full possession of their mental faculties.

I think a citizens' assembly should be selected to advise on future ACT legislation on these matters, in the context of world experience, expert advice and polls of the ACT electorate.