rawpixel 769305 unsplash 960px

New depth to slippery slope in California

A new Californian bill allows an individual to aid, advise, and encourage a person to commit suicide - and sign off on the method of suicide-while financially benefitting from the person’s death.

FamilyVoice WA Director Darryl Budge is deeply concerned by this new depth to the slippery slope. "Introducing legal coercion to direct financial beneficiaries of a person's lawful killing would explode the cases of elder abuse, where murder, not just financial exploitation, will be the common result."

"Family members who "encourage" the terminally ill into killing themselves will be granted full legal immunity, regardless of their motives for doing so. The patient would have to explicitly state in their will that any family member who encourages assisted suicide are to receive nothing," The Daily Wire reported.

Yesterday an Australian man who stood to gain $1.4 million in life insurance was convicted of aiding his wife's suicide. Cases like this would be legal in California if this bill passes.



130208 AAPQldPoliceUnion unborn baby

The Abortion Bill proposed by Labor’s Jackie Trad is considered the most radical proposal to come before an Australian parliament. Over 6000 submissions were received and over 23,879 people signed the petition opposing the Bill.

In my submission to the Queensland Parliamentary Committee appointed to the matter I pointed out the following:

The language is in places dangerously obscure. For example, it could be interpreted that if a mother caused the death of her unborn child for any reason, at any time before birth, she would be not guilty of killing the child simply by claiming it was an abortion. (Part 3 paragraph 10)

It permits Safe Access Zones to be increased beyond 150 meters if a judge or magistrate considers a clinic has a case for an extension. (Part 4 Division 1, paragraph 4)

It fails to understand conscientious objection. It assumes that this applies only to not being personally involved in the abortion, but not to the duty to refer a patient for an abortion. (Section 8) Further it fails to understand that a faith-based medical institution may have been established with a conscientious commitment to protect life including the life of the unborn as an article of faith. Conscientious objection applies not only to individual persons but to faith-based institutions and entire communities of faith.

It is proposed abortion be on request with no requirements for a woman to be counselled. The assumption may be that this releases a woman from being influenced against an abortion. The greater issue is that a woman may be being coerced and proceeding because she feels unsupported. If the woman’s wellbeing was truly being considered this option should be included. Further this makes false the claim that this proposal seeks to remove abortion from the criminal code making it a medical matter. If it were a medical matter then a medical reasons would be required.

There is no protection for a child being terminated based purely on sex selection.

The reading of submissions listed (https://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/work-of-committees/committees/HCDSDFVPC/inquiries/current-inquiries/TerminationOfPregnancyB18) shows that most oppose the Bill for very substantial reasons.

Those who are proposing it to the Parliament should be embarrassed by its inadequacy and lack of humanity.

The Australian Senate has voted to retain Christian prayer, including the Lord's Prayer, at the start of daily business. The Senate’s Procedures Committee found no compelling reason to change the status quo with the vast majority of the 800 submissions received opposing the change, including one from FamilyVoice Australia.

"This wise action is to be commended," said FamilyVoice National Secretary David d'Lima. “This practice is in keeping with the spirit of the Preamble to the Constitution, by which 'the people ... humbly relying on the blessing of Almighty God have agreed to unite…' And also, the decision is coherent with the basis of Australia's national identity, customs, laws, values and institutions."

It is always deeply gratifying to get a good result when we have put time into a submission or a campaign. While it may seem peripheral to the main business of Parliament, this prayer speaks to the very basis of our national wellbeing, for in doing so the Parliament humbly asks Almighty God for His blessing upon Parliament, and that He “direct and prosper (their) deliberations to the advancement of (His) glory, and the true welfare of the people of Australia.” A great prayer. We thank our supporters for resourcing us to do this important work.

Controversial gender and sexuality fluidity material is out of NSW schools, but parents may still question the sexuality content of high school courses

The NSW Liberal government’s replacement for the Crossroads high school course will no longer push gender questioning and sexual fluidity.

The new Life Ready senior high program updates materials from five of the six Crossroads modules, including mental health and wellbeing; drugs and alcohol; relationships, sexual health, relationships and sexuality; and safe travel.

A new ‘independence’ module replaces the controversial ‘own identity’ material, which had discussed “binary thinking about gender and sexuality” and pushed a gender theory view of gender questioning, sexual identity, transgender and same-sex attraction. The new module will focus on financial literacy, civic engagement and body image.

Education Minister Rob Stokes said, “Disproportionate emphasis on contested gender theories are not helpful in a limited 25-hour course whose primary aim is to specifically prepare students for post-school
life.” He said that gender and sexuality are “sufficiently covered” in the health and physical education syllabus released in 2018 that is mandatory for all schools.

“While this is welcome news, the battle isn’t over yet as it is imperative that parents press teachers on the sexuality content in order to keep that in check as many no doubt will have untoward, politically correct agendas of their own,” said FamilyVoice NSW spokesperson Graham Isbister.


A counter protest was held against the legalisation of physician assisted suicide and euthanasia at Parliament House last Thursday 23rd August at 11:00 am.

Darryl Budge, FamilyVoice WA Director and Vice President, Coalition for the Defense of Human Life (CDHL) for the counter protest said, “We value our doctors and their commitment to preserving life. Euthanasia would turn doctors from healers to killers. It would cause them to dishonour the Hippocratic Oath to ‘First Do No Harm.’”

Furthermore, Mr Budge stated, “We must offer patients dignity, not death. A 2005 Canadian and Perth trial of dignity therapy showed better, more targeted palliative care dramatically altered desire for death.” [1]

Mr Budge fears that euthanasia laws would “put vulnerable and innocent people at risk, including the Indigenous and disabled communities, who feel assisted suicide fundamentally undermines their trust in the medical establishment.


The committee’s alarming 229-page majority report recommends going beyond granting access to those with terminal illness to include chronic and neurodegenerative conditions “where death is reasonably foreseeable as a result of the condition”. Similar clauses in Canada have been interpreted by the Ontario Supreme Court to allow assisted suicide for a 77 year old woman with osteoarthritis, which is a non-fatal condition. Doctors who object to assisted suicide will be forced to refer to a doctor willing to assist suicide. 

Pro-life MP Nick Goiran released a 245-page comprehensive dissenting minority report, which refutes the claims of the majority report.

According to Mr Goiran, evidence from jurisdictions around the world, and even closer to home in the Northern Territory, demonstrates that no jurisdiction has yet created a safe legislative model to protect vulnerable members from a wrongful death.  "Patient capacity, mental health, medical error in prognosis, misdiagnosis, undue influence, elder abuse and duress on people living with disability are just some of the many areas in which assisted suicide laws present far too great a risk especially given that the consequences are final.  What we can say with certainty from the lived experience in other jurisdictions is that casualties are guaranteed."

"As a co-chair of the Parliamentary Friends of Palliative Care, I am convinced that the Government’s greater priority ought to be the making of specialist palliative care accessible throughout Western Australia.  In the end I agree with Dr Michael Gannon who in May this year as President of the Australian Medical Association said: 'I have serious concerns about a community where we make arbitrary decisions about whose life is valuable enough to continue and whose should be ended under the law.  A society should aspire to look after people who are struggling and to make sure that their lives are worth living.  We should aspire to even better end-of-life care.  We should aspire to better palliative care.'"

The majority report notes FamilyVoice Australia’s contribution to the euthanasia inquiry committee on page 445: “[w]e cannot afford to send mixed messages about the value of life or about suicide. So in a sense giving in to a person, whether older or younger, when they are for one reason or another suffering and desiring to end their life, in my view is bad policy and actually is counterproductive.”


  1. Harvey Max Chochinov et al., ‘Dignity Therapy : A Novel Psychotherapeutic Intervention for Patients Near the End of Life’ Journal of Clinical Oncology, Vol 23, No 24 (August 20), 2005: pp. 5520-5525.